List proxy locations

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and idempotent, and the description adds behavioral detail beyond them: `q` supports partial search, as shown by 'sao' finding Sao Paulo, and the result set is exit locations for new numbers. It could mention pagination explicitly, but cursor/limit in the schema cover that.

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 with no redundant phrasing. The most important information (what the tool lists and why it matters) is front-loaded, and the usage example is compact and concrete.

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 a read-only lookup with no required parameters and no output schema, the description conveys the key semantics well: what is returned, for which flows, and how to filter. It leaves response shape implicit, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to call and interpret the result 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds one layer of meaning by showing that `q` supports partial search and by framing `country` as a filter. Limit and cursor are left to the schema, which documents them sufficiently, so this is a small but real enhancement.

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 a specific resource (proxy locations) and explains what they are: countries and cities a new number's proxy can exit from. It also ties the tool to create_account and create_invitation, giving it a clear role among the many sibling tools.

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 the intended context (for create_account and create_invitation) and describes two usage modes: search with `q` or filter by `country`. It doesn't name exclusions or a competing tool, but no comparable alternative appears in the sibling list, so the guidance is adequate.

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