proxy_snapshot_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It clearly indicates 'Summarize' which is a read operation, but it does not disclose details like whether results are aggregated counts, whether it respects filters, or whether it returns any data at all. There is no contradiction, but the behavioral detail is thin.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. It is efficient with no filler words, though it could be slightly more detailed 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 the tool has 3 optional parameters and an output schema is absent, the description is adequate but minimal. It does not explain what kind of summary is produced (e.g., counts by country, protocol), which could be critical for an agent deciding whether to call this tool. The lack of output schema makes the description's lack of return-format detail a notable gap.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters, including descriptions for each (country, protocol, checkedWithinMin). The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. No additional parameter context is needed.

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 a clear verb ('Summarize') and resource ('proxy snapshot'), but it is vague about what 'snapshot' means—it could refer to the current proxy pool state or a specific snapshot object. It does not differentiate from siblings like 'list_proxies' or 'pick_best_proxies' beyond the verb, so an agent might confuse it with a simple listing tool.

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 implies a read-only summarization but does not state when to use this tool versus 'list_proxies' or 'pick_best_proxies'. It lacks explicit guidance on use cases (e.g., for an overview of the current pool) or when to avoid it (e.g., when detailed per-proxy data is needed).

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