add_proxy

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: 'Validated, deduped, backed up, atomic. Credentials are masked in the response.' This complements the idempotentHint and destructiveHint annotations effectively.

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 concise sentences: main action first, then key behavioral traits, then usage guidance. No wasted words.

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?

Covers creation, validation, idempotency, credential masking, and post-usage. Lacks error handling or edge cases (e.g., duplicate pool name), but output schema likely fills gaps. Good for a focused creation tool.

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 0% so description must compensate. It identifies the two parameters ('proxy URL' and 'pool') but lacks detailed format or constraints. Validation is mentioned but not specified. Adequate but not thorough.

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 states the verb 'Add a proxy URL to a named pool' and specifies the target resource ('settings.json'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'remove_proxy' and 'test_proxy' by focusing on addition.

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?

Provides guidance on how to assign the added proxy to accounts via 'update_account(proxy="pool:<name>")'. Implicitly contrasts with removal/testing tools, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use alternatives.

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