manage_proxies

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

The description adds important behavioral detail beyond annotations: 'create' queues in Adobe Media Encoder and returns immediately, with rendering in the background. It explains the required follow-up call. Annotations do not contradict; readOnlyHint=false is appropriate.

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 concise with three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds essential information without redundancy.

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 the tool's complexity (5 parameters, async behavior, multi-step workflow), the description covers key points: actions, return behavior, parameter dependencies. It does not explain return values, but no output schema exists and the workflow is clearly described.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context by explaining the relationship between output_path (used in 'create') and proxy_path (required for 'attach'), and that preset_path is optional with a default behavior. This adds value beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool is for creating, attaching, or toggling proxies for a project item. It specifies the three actions and their workflow. It distinguishes from sibling tools like has_proxy and detach_proxy by describing the multi-step process.

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 description provides explicit guidance: use 'create' first to queue encoding, then later call 'attach' with the proxy_path from the output_path. It explains why there is no single-call create-and-attach. However, it does not mention when to use 'toggle' or compare with sibling tools.

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