rotate_proxy

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation and network profile is covered. The description adds that the operation 'restart[s]', which is meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations. It does not say what the restart clears (page state, cookies, session) or whether the call waits for completion, which are the details an agent actually needs.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the action first and the prerequisite reference second. No filler and nothing redundant with the schema or annotations.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, for a zero-parameter operation that mutates the browser environment and restarts it, the description should at least hint at state loss or whether the restart is synchronous. Adequate but with a clear gap for a restart-class tool.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate beyond what the empty schema shows. Baseline 4 applies; the description correctly doesn't waste space documenting non-existent arguments.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Switch to the next proxy in the configured list', with the scope (configured list) that distinguishes it from the `configure` sibling which defines the list. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from other environment-changing siblings like `new_identity` or `load_session`, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 parenthetical 'see configure proxies=[...]' supplies a clear prerequisite: the proxy list must first be configured. Usage context is therefore clear, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to rotate (e.g., mid-navigation) or which sibling to prefer for other identity changes.

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