create_proxy_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes the create operation and the lack of an edit path, but does not disclose success/error responses, potential side effects, or whether the operation is synchronous. This is a partial gap, but the description still provides some context beyond the bare action.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. No fluff or redundancy.

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 tool has 11 parameters and no output schema, but the description captures the essential domain logic (geo-targeting modes and the no-edit workflow). It does not explain rotation modes or format options, but these are documented in the schema. The description is adequate for understanding the tool's purpose and main constraints.

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 input schema already covers 73% of parameters with descriptions, including mutual exclusivity and valid values. The description reinforces the two input modes and the optional subfilters, but does not add new details about formats, defaults, or rotation behavior beyond what the schema offers. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool creates a new geo-targeted proxy list, using the verb 'create' and the resource 'proxy list', distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_proxy_lists and delete_proxy_list. The phrase 'geo-targeted' adds specificity about the list's purpose.

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 gives explicit guidance on when to use the tool (for creating) and when not to (editing existing lists), saying 'To edit an existing list, delete it and create a new one.' It also explains the two mutually exclusive input modes (single country vs. countries array), providing context for parameter selection.

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