update_pmp_deal

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'Update an existing PMP deal' without explaining whether this is a partial update (PATCH-like) or full replacement (PUT-like), what happens with unspecified optional fields, or any side effects. This adds no behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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 sentence with no filler words. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded with the action and resource.

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?

With 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It does not explain partial vs full update semantics, what the response looks like, or any constraints on updating geo/audience targets. The schema picks up some slack, but the description should provide more operational context for an AI agent.

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 100%, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides; it does not mention that only id is required or how the optional fields are applied.

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 action (Update) and the resource (existing PMP deal), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_pmp_deal, delete_pmp_deal, and list_pmp_deals. It is specific and unambiguous.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The usage is implied by the tool name and sibling context (create vs update vs delete), but the description does not state prerequisites, when not to use, or contrast with create_pmp_deal.

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