Get a Wiro model schema

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds behavioral context by revealing that the tool returns a `run_model` next action and emphasizes using it 'exactly once', which helps the agent understand the tool's role in the workflow. No contradictions with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description consists of two concise sentences: the first enumerates the output contents, and the second provides a precise actionable instruction. No wasted words or redundant details.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with one parameter and an output schema present, the description covers what data is returned (parameters, options, defaults, required fields, pricing) and how to proceed (fill required parameters, follow `run_model`). It doesn't need to explain return values because the output schema exists, and the workflow hint is sufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema fully documents the only parameter ('model') with a clear description and example format, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, meriting the baseline score of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one model's typed parameters, options, defaults, required fields, and pricing'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like run_model (which executes) and search_models (which discovers), and even adds workflow context by instructing to follow the returned `run_model` action.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies when to use this tool (before running a model) by instructing to 'Fill its required parameters and follow the returned `run_model` next action'. It provides clear context but does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, though the sibling list makes the distinction apparent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.