list_proxies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states 'List verified free proxies' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose any behavioral details such as default filters, pagination, what 'verified' means, or how filters combine. It adds minimal value beyond the action itself.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It states the action and resource clearly. It is appropriately concise for a list operation, though it could benefit from more context, it is efficiently structured.

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 tool with 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It does not explain what 'verified' means, how filters interact, or what the response format looks like. An agent would need to rely entirely on the schema, which lacks behavioral and output context.

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 100% with detailed descriptions for all 9 parameters. The description's mention of 'matching filters' is generic and does not add specific meaning to any parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema fully documents parameter semantics.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'verified free proxies', and mentions 'matching filters'. This is a specific action on a defined resource. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like pick_best_proxies or proxy_snapshot_stats, so it lacks sibling distinction.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the siblings. It does not mention alternative tools, conditions, or exclusions. There is no context about when listing proxies is preferable to picking the best or getting snapshot stats.

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