Create a proxy

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

The description adds a critical non-obvious behavior: the connection is made by the Dolphin app on the client machine, not by this server. This goes beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) and tells the agent that no connectivity testing or external connection is performed here.

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?

Two sentences, each earning its place: the first states the action and purpose, the second prevents a common misconception about server involvement. No verbose or redundant text.

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?

The description covers the core function and the most important behavioral caveat, making it sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's role. Some details such as return values, uniqueness behavior, and validation are not mentioned, but for a simple creation tool with a moderately detailed schema, this is mostly complete.

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 description adds no parameter-level information. Schema coverage is only 43%, and fields like login, password, port, and type lack descriptions in both the schema and the description. Since the description does not compensate for the low schema coverage, this dimension is weak.

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 verb ('Save') and resource ('a proxy') and explains the purpose ('so it can be attached to profiles'). This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like update_proxy or delete_proxy.

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 provides clear context by indicating the saved proxy is for later attachment to profiles, and explicitly clarifies that the server does not make the connection, setting expectations for when this tool is appropriate. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like update_proxy, but the context is strong enough.

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