octobrowser_create_proxy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether creation is idempotent, whether duplicate proxies are allowed, what permissions are needed, or whether any side effects occur (e.g., affecting existing profiles). The single sentence reveals nothing 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 extremely concise—one sentence with no fluff—but it is under-specified for a tool with six parameters and three required fields. It is efficient but lacks structured context, earning a middle score.

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 complexity (six parameters) and absence of an output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain how a proxy is used within the broader browser context or mention related concepts like profiles, which are present in sibling tools. The description is too minimal to be considered complete.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., host, port, type). It does not clarify the relationship between parameters or emphasize which are required, but the schema handles this.

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 'Create a new proxy' uses a specific verb (create) and resource (proxy), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_proxy and delete_proxy. However, it lacks additional detail about the proxy's role or context, so it is clear but not fully differentiated beyond the verb.

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 alternatives, such as when to use create_proxy instead of update_proxy or delete_proxy. There are no mentions of prerequisites, required fields, or typical use cases.

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