upwork_get_proposals

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the output format (list with specific fields), which is good. However, it doesn't disclose any behavioral traits like read-only nature, permission requirements, or clarify the meaning of the status parameter values.

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 is extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second lists key return fields. No superfluous information, perfectly front-loaded.

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?

Given the existence of an output schema and the sibling tools, the description provides enough context for a list operation. It mentions the key fields returned. However, it could mention pagination or the effect of the limit parameter, though that is covered by the schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with both parameters described. The description adds context about the output fields but not about the parameters themselves. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 'Get your submitted proposals on Upwork' with a specific verb and resource. It also mentions the return fields (job title, status, bid amount, dates), distinguishing it from sibling tools like upwork_get_proposal_details which focuses on a single proposal.

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?

While the description implies when to use this tool (to list proposals), it does not explicitly state when to use alternatives or mention exclusions. For example, it could note that for detailed info on a specific proposal, use upwork_get_proposal_details.

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