borrowip_get_proxy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It describes the return value and usage but does not explicitly confirm that this is a read-only operation, nor does it disclose potential side effects, authorization requirements, or error behavior (e.g., invalid key). The 'get' verb implies non-destructive action but is not explicit.

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 well-structured, front-loading the main purpose, then providing return format and usage examples. It is concise without unnecessary repetition, though the examples could be slightly trimmed without loss of clarity.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers return type, usage, and parameter semantics. It lacks error handling details and limitations, but for a straightforward 'get' tool, it 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining the 'key' parameter: its optional nature, format (e.g., BIP-xxxxxx), and default behavior (uses first available). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type and default.

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 'Get a ready-to-use SOCKS5 proxy URL' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like borrowip_list_proxies (which lists proxies) and borrowip_fetch by focusing on obtaining a single usable proxy URL.

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 provides usage examples for CloakBrowser, curl, and requests, and explains the 'key' parameter behavior. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like borrowip_list_proxies or borrowip_fetch, nor does it mention scenarios where the tool should not be used.

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