get_proxy__id_

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Find proxy by id' implies a read operation, but it doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or what happens if the proxy isn't found. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand how to use it safely.

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?

The description is very concise with just three words, which is front-loaded and efficient. However, it borders on under-specification, as it could benefit from slightly more detail to clarify purpose without becoming verbose.

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?

Given no annotations, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and one parameter, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain return values, error cases, or usage context, making it inadequate for a tool that likely retrieves sensitive proxy data.

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 0%, with one parameter 'id' undocumented in the schema. The description adds minimal meaning by implying 'id' is used to find a proxy, but it doesn't specify the format (e.g., string type, expected values) or constraints, failing to compensate for the low coverage.

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 'Find proxy by id' clearly states the action (find) and resource (proxy), but it's vague about what 'find' means—does it retrieve details, check existence, or something else? It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'get_proxy_v2' or 'get_proxy_shared', which might have different scopes or filters.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like 'get_proxy_v2' and 'get_proxy_shared', there's no indication of differences in context, such as whether this is for a specific proxy lookup versus bulk retrieval or shared proxies.

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