proxy_update

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

Annotations provide minimal behavioral hints (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds that the tool modifies properties but lacks details on side effects, auth requirements, or idempotency.

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 three well-structured sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the purpose, followed by details and usage guidance, making it highly efficient.

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 simplicity and presence of output schema, the description covers the core functionality and partial update behavior. It is complete for an update tool, though it could mention return value implications.

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%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by mentioning specific fields (name, operating mode, description) and the partial update pattern, going beyond schema descriptions.

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 updates an existing proxy in Zabbix and lists modifiable properties (name, operating mode, description). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like proxy_create or proxy_delete.

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 advises to 'only specify the fields you want to change', implying partial updates. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, though the purpose implies it for existing proxies.

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