nex_proxy_modify

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure, and it does add useful context: this is a partial update and credentials are never returned. It still omits mutation-specific details such as permissions, reversibility, and what happens to omitted fields.

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 short sentences with no filler, front-loading the operation and then the two most useful behavioral notes. Every sentence contributes something actionable.

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 nine-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is only minimally complete. It clarifies partial updates and credential non-return, but does not resolve the lack of required-parameter guidance or explain the id/proxyId relationship.

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 78%, so most parameter meaning is already documented in the schema. The description adds the important partial-update instruction but does not clarify the id/proxyId alias, which fields are required, or protocol defaults.

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 names a specific verb and resource: "Update one existing custom proxy resource." It clearly distinguishes updating a single existing proxy from creation or batch operations, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools such as nex_proxy_create or nex_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 phrase "Pass only the fields that must change" gives clear guidance that this is a partial-update operation. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this instead of nex_proxy_create, nex_proxy_delete, or nex_proxy_detect.

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