proxy_hosts

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: which actions are read-only, that mutations require human approval or a configured override, and that dry_run avoids the approval prompt. It does not detail exactly what data is destroyed or how updates merge with existing settings.

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 three compact sentences with no wasted language. Read-only behavior, mutation approval, and dry_run preview are front-loaded in a logical order.

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 an 11-parameter tool with 0% schema description coverage, the description is not complete enough about what the individual fields mean or how they affect each action. It covers mutation safety and dry_run well, and an output schema exists, but the substantial parameter documentation gap leaves an agent under-equipped to invoke create or update 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for 11 parameters, so the description must carry the burden. It explains action modes and dry_run meaningfully, but leaves domain_names, forward_host, forward_port, host_id, ssl, force_ssl, block_exploits, limit, and offset undocumented.

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 the resource ('Proxy hosts') and explicitly maps its action modes to read-only versus mutating behavior. It does not differentiate from siblings such as proxy_redirections or proxy_certificates, but an agent can still infer the tool's purpose from the action enum and description.

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?

It clearly states that list/get are read-only while create/update/delete change NPM and require approval or HOMELAB_PROXY_ALLOW_WRITES=true, and that dry_run=true previews without asking. It does not explain when to choose this tool over sibling proxy tools, but it gives strong operational guidance for the supported actions.

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