proxy.list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing about what is returned, whether the pool is global or session-scoped, or what permissions are needed. "Never credentials" is a caution, not a behavioral disclosure.

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 terse fragments are economical but under-specified rather than concise; brevity here removes the information an agent needs, and the fragments are not a coherent sentence.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description is the only source of information, and it omits return contents, scope, and pagination behavior for a list tool. It is inadequate for an agent to invoke the tool with confidence.

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 declares zero parameters, so per the calibration baseline a 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. No parameter claims are made or contradicted.

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 proxy pool. Never credentials." is a noun fragment that restates the tool name rather than stating a verb+resource action; it never says it lists or returns proxies. The only value-add is negative framing, which does not convey what the tool does.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no named alternative among the many siblings (credential.list, profile.list, session.export, etc.). "Never credentials" is an implicit boundary against credential tools, but no positive selection condition is given.

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