Put a proxy into an AdsPower profile

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true) by stating exactly what is destroyed (the profile's current proxy settings are replaced), the local-runtime and API-key prerequisites, and the operational caveat that an open profile must be restarted to apply.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the core action before the replacement warning and prerequisites. Every clause carries operational information; the parenthetical about mobile-proxy change-IP links is the only mildly tangential detail.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema and only three simple parameters, the definition covers prerequisites, side effects, and the post-call restart requirement. It omits what the tool returns and does not clarify the http/socks5 protocol choice, leaving a small 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?

Schema coverage is 67%: proxy_id and profile_id already carry descriptions ('from list_proxies', 'AdsPower profile id (user_id)'), and the description mostly repeats those while adding that host/port/login/password/change-IP link are sourced from the stored proxy record. The 'protocol' enum is never explained in prose, so the description adds only marginal value over 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?

States a precise verb+resource+target: writes a mobileproxy.space proxy into an AdsPower browser profile via the AdsPower Local API. That is clearly distinguishable from siblings like update_proxy_settings or change_proxy_credentials, which operate on the proxy rather than pushing it into a browser profile.

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?

Gives clear when-to-use context and prerequisites (AdsPower running locally, Local API enabled, ADSPOWER_API_KEY if security verification is on) and warns to confirm with the user because existing settings are replaced. It stops short of naming explicit alternatives for the non-AdsPower path, so it is strong but not fully prescriptive.

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