list_proxies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation by saying 'list', but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as safety, side effects, pagination, or authentication requirements. This is minimal transparency.

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 succinct sentences: first states action and output fields, second gives when to use. No fluff, front-loaded with essential information.

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?

The description covers the basic purpose and output fields but lacks details about sorting, filtering, or differentiation from similar sibling tools like get_proxy_list. For a simple list tool without output schema, it is adequate but not fully complete.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100% vacuously. The description adds value by explaining the output fields and usage, which is appropriate for a no-param tool.

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 tool lists residential proxy services and enumerates the fields (id, name, flavor, status, plan, expiry). It distinguishes from siblings like get_proxy (singular) by specifying 'list' and 'residential proxy services', and provides example use cases.

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 explicitly gives two use scenarios: 'what proxy services do I have?' and 'find a proxy service id'. It does not mention when not to use or alternatives like get_proxy_list, but the guidance is clear enough for a simple list tool.

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