nex_proxy_list

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a non-mutating operation, and the description reinforces this with the visible safety note that 'Credentials are never returned'. It also clarifies the operation is scoped to the active Nex roser workspace, which is relevant context beyond the annotation alone.

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 short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the security-related caveat about credentials is added as a single clean second sentence.

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?

Because it is a read-only listing tool with no required parameters, the description is mostly sufficient for a correct invocation. Missing contextual detail includes what the returned proxy objects look like and how the filter parameters affect results, but the absence is mitigated by the clearly stated selection purpose and the readOnly annotation.

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 schema description coverage is only 20%, so the description should compensate by explaining the five parameters. It does not explain page, size, source, or keyword at all, and the only parameter given useful schema-level text is state. The description focuses on the tool purpose but leaves a low-coverage parameter surface essentially undocumented.

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 ('List'), a clear resource ('proxy resources available in the active NexBrowser workspace'), and the actionable purpose of selecting a proxyId for window creation or binding. This fee distinct from the proxy mutation tools like nex_proxy_import, nex_proxy_create, and nex_proxy_delete. An agent can instantly know what the tool returns and why it exists.

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 gives a concrete use case: 'so a proxyId can be selected for window creation or binding'. It also implies that this is the place to look for existing proxyId candidates rather than creating or importing proxies. It does not formerly enumerate exclusions or alternatives, but's unthed expectations are clear.

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