ruyi_set_proxy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does an excellent job. It states that the proxy cannot be switched after browser startup, that this tool does not actually switch proxies, and that it only returns status information. It also clarifies that the proxyUrl parameter is for reference only.

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 three concise sentences, each packed with essential information. It front-loads the critical warning about proxy setup, states the tool's limitation, and gives the correct procedure. No wasted words.

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 optional parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete. It explains the tool's purpose, its limitation, the correct usage pattern, and what it returns (instructions and current proxy status). There are no significant gaps.

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 description for proxyUrl already states it is '仅参考，不会实际切换' (reference only, no actual switch), and the tool description reinforces this. The added context about the tool's non-functional nature and the correct alternative workflow enhances the parameter's meaning beyond the schema.

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 explicitly states that the tool '仅返回说明和当前代理状态' (only returns instructions and current proxy status), which clearly defines its purpose despite the misleading name. It also distinguishes itself from ruyi_new_page by explaining that the proxy must be set there.

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 gives explicit instructions on when to use this tool: not for switching proxy but for checking status. It provides the correct alternative workflow: quit browser with ruyi_browser_quit, then call ruyi_new_page with the new proxy. This is clear and actionable.

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