deploy_proxy

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the high-level purpose. It does not disclose that this is a state-changing on-chain transaction requiring a private key, that gas fees will be incurred, or any ownership/admin implications. For a mutation tool, this lacks behavioral transparency.

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 efficiently communicates the core purpose without redundancy, making it highly concise.

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?

With 9 parameters and no output schema, the description is far too sparse to be contextually complete. It does not explain the relationship between initData and initFunction/abi/initArgs, which parameters apply conditionally (e.g., adminAddress for transparent proxy), or any deployment prerequisites. The schema alone cannot compensate for missing high-level guidance.

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 does not add meaningful parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides; it mentions proxy types and implementation, which are already explicit in the schema enums and property names.

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 states a specific action ('Deploy a proxy contract') with clear resource (UUPS or TransparentUpgradeableProxy) and purpose ('pointing to an implementation'). It distinguishes itself from general deployment tools like deploy_contract or deploy_create2 by focusing on proxy deployment.

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 clearly implies this tool is for proxy deployment, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like deploy_contract or upgrade_proxy. There is no mention of exclusions or alternative tool recommendations, so usage guidance is only implied.

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