Update Server Group

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description is not required to cover that. It adds context about refresh_interval (live-verified, range 240-1440), but does not disclose other behavioral aspects like side effects or permissions.

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 exceptionally concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds a critical parameter detail. No wasted words.

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?

While the output schema exists, the description is incomplete given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, 4 required). It only covers refresh_interval, leaving agents uninformed about other required fields like group_id and name.

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 description coverage is only 13%, leaving most parameters undocumented. The description only adds meaning for refresh_interval, repeating the schema info. It does not explain group_id, name, parent_server_group_id, ui_color, notes, policies, or request_id.

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 'Update' and the resource 'existing Automox server group', distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_server_group and delete_server_group. The additional detail about refresh_interval further clarifies the tool'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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_server_group or other mutation tools. It fails to mention prerequisites or when not to use it.

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