security_proxy_test

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions features but does not disclose behavioral traits like network calls, data handling, side effects, or read-only nature. Lacks transparency for a proxy testing tool.

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?

Some unnecessary repetition ('Advanced Proxy Tester. Test proxies...') and includes redundant 'Menu ID'. Reference to describe_tool could be more integrated. Reasonably short but not optimally structured.

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?

Incomplete for a tool with 2 parameters (including a nested object) and no output schema. Lacks details on input format, options structure, or return values. Relies on external describe_tool call, reducing self-containment.

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?

Description entirely omits explanations for both parameters ('proxies' and 'options'). Schema coverage is 0%, and the description adds no value beyond what the schema provides. Fails to compensate for the gap.

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?

Clearly states the tool tests proxies with specific features (real-time analysis, anonymity detection, speed testing, geographic location) and supported types. Differentiates from siblings like security_proxy_test_single and security_proxy_test_stream.

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?

Implies usage by describing functionality but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus its siblings or provide exclusions. References describe_tool for more guidance, which is indirect.

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