proxy_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds context about proxies but does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide, such as pagination or rate limits.

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 two sentences; the first serves the purpose, but the second provides background that is not essential for tool usage. It is adequately concise but could be more focused.

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 is a simple get operation with an output schema, the description provides conceptual context but lacks details on pagination, filtering, or expected behavior beyond what the schema offers.

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 high (89%), so baseline is appropriate. The description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, but the schema itself is well-documented.

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 'Get proxies from Zabbix,' identifying the verb and resource. It also explains what proxies are, which helps distinguish from other get tools, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like host_get or item_get.

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 vs alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or suggestions for other tools such as proxy_create or proxy_update.

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