start_socks4

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

With no annotations provided, the description partially covers behavior by stating it starts a proxy tunnel and returns a tunnel ID, but does not disclose potential side effects, authentication needs, or constraints like requiring a live agent.

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?

Two concise sentences with no extraneous information, front-loaded with the action and key result.

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 4 parameters, no annotations, and no parameter descriptions in schema, the description is too minimal. It does not cover parameter semantics nor provide enough context for correct invocation.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not explain any parameters (agent_id, lhost, lport, description). Users have no guidance on what values are valid or how they affect the operation.

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 verb 'Start' and resource 'SOCKS4 proxy tunnel', specifies it binds a listener on the teamserver host, and distinguishes from siblings like start_socks5 by mentioning SOCKS4 protocol.

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 usage for SOCKS4 tunneling but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like start_socks5, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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