proxy_list_tls_fingerprints

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not state whether the operation is read-only, if it affects capture state, or what scope of traffic is considered (e.g., current session only). The agent cannot infer safety or side effects.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word adds value; no unnecessary information.

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 basic functionality adequately for a simple tool with 2 optional parameters and no output schema. However, it lacks context such as read-only nature or that it operates on the current capture session. Sibling tool count is high but not addressed.

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% with both parameters described. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the schema, but it does mention 'occurrence counts' in the output, which is helpful. 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 verb 'list' and the resource 'unique client JA3/JA4 fingerprints' with additional detail 'occurrence counts'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like proxy_get_tls_fingerprints (which likely returns specific details) and proxy_list_fingerprint_presets (presets vs captured traffic).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., proxy_get_tls_fingerprints) nor mentions prerequisites like an active capture session. There is no explicit 'when not to use' or context for selection.

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