proxy_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does substantial work: it declares this an 'Authenticated read', names the upstream source (Caddy admin API), and characterizes the route table as tri-state. It does not mention failure modes (e.g., proxy down, auth failure) or whether the admin API call can be slow, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

One front-loaded summary sentence followed by one supporting sentence that adds the auth source and the sibling distinction. Nothing is padding; the parenthetical field list doubles as return-value documentation.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must preview the return shape, and it does: TLS subjects plus CA fingerprint, apex registration, respawn backoff, and a tri-state route table. The term 'tri-state' is left unexplained and failure/empty-state behavior is not covered, but an agent has enough to call the tool correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly avoids inventing inputs.

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?

Specific verb ('Get') plus a well-scoped resource ('the embedded proxy's typed state') and an enumerated list of what that state covers. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling list_routes by calling itself a complement to the DB-authoritative inventory, so an agent can choose between them without reading schemas.

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 line 'Complements list_routes (the DB-authoritative inventory)' signals the intended division of labor: this tool for live Caddy-runtime state, list_routes for the stored inventory. There is no explicit 'use when / do not use when' phrasing, but the routing context is clear enough.

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