Retrieves a list of proxies with filtering, sorting, and pagination options.

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds only the default-paging behavior, which is marginally useful but lacks detail on result limits, total counts, or ordering guarantees beyond what the schema defaults imply.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core capability and ending on default behavior. The phrase "provides functionality for" is mild filler, but there is no real bloat.

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 paginated list tool with full schema coverage, complete annotations, and no output schema, the description covers purpose, filterable dimensions, and default behavior adequately. Minor gaps around result limits are already handled by schema defaults.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 8 parameters, making baseline 3 appropriate. The description aggregates the filterable fields (workspace ID, folder ID, proxy ID, name, sorting) but notably omits proxyUri, so it adds little beyond the schema and is slightly incomplete.

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 clear resource (proxies) and the operations applied (filtering, sorting, pagination), so an agent knows this is a listing tool. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like get_proxy_folders or the single-proxy mutations, but the read/list intent is unambiguous.

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 final sentence describes default behavior when no parameters are supplied ("default page of proxies in standard order"), which is genuinely useful context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives guidance and no named alternative for retrieving a single proxy.

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