Disable Proxy Host

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the mutation ('changes NPM host state'), the operational consequence ('stops that host from serving traffic'), the reversibility profile ('retaining its configuration'), and a safe preview mode. It does not mention permission/auth requirements or idempotency, which is the only remaining gap.

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?

Five short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the core action leads. The final dry_run sentence largely duplicates the schema's own description, which is the only wasted motion.

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 two-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and an output schema, nothing needed for correct invocation is missing. Return-value explanation is unnecessary given the output schema, and the description's one-line note about the updated host object is a harmless bonus.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (id, dry_run) are already fully documented in the schema; the description's restatement of dry_run adds no new syntax or format detail. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 specific verb and resource ('Disable a proxy host by ID') plus the key semantic distinction from the obvious sibling: configuration is retained rather than removed. An agent can immediately tell it apart from delete_proxy_host and from enable_proxy_host.

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?

Explicitly routes to alternatives with conditions: delete_proxy_host for removal, list_proxy_hosts to check status, dry_run=True to preview. This is exactly the when/when-not/alternatives structure that removes inference.

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