octobrowser_delete_proxy

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

With no annotations provided, the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action with no mention of permanence, side effects, permissions, or error behavior. For a destructive operation, this lack of transparency is a significant gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple delete operation, but it is so terse that it lacks any additional helpful context, which prevents a perfect 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 is a delete operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It omits critical context such as irreversibility, scope, or how to safely invoke it. The simplicity of the tool does not excuse the lack of behavioral disclosure.

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 fully describes the single parameter 'uuid' as 'Proxy UUID', giving 100% schema description coverage. The description adds no extra parameter context, but the baseline of 3 applies since the schema handles the documentation adequately.

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 'Delete a proxy' clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (proxy), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like octobrowser_delete_profiles. It is specific enough to understand the tool's core function, though it lacks a mention of the UUID parameter.

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, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusion criteria. Users are left to infer that this is for deleting a single proxy, but there is no explicit context or comparison to other proxy or deletion tools.

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