update-permission-group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It merely states 'updates' without specifying whether it is a partial or full update, idempotency, authorization requirements, or side effects. This lack of behavioral context is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 redundancy, which is concise. However, it is so terse that it sacrifices substantive information. It does not use bullet points or structure to aid readability, but it is not overly long.

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?

Given the complexity (nested request body with many fields, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It does not explain success/error behavior, how to construct the `requestBody`, or the effect of various permission flags. The tool requires more context to be safely invoked by 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?

The description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. Although schema coverage is reported as 50%, the actual schema includes descriptions for all properties, so the description does not compensate for any missing parameter documentation. It merely repeats the parameter name and role from the schema.

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 explicitly states the action ('updates') and resource ('Permission Group'), and identifies the key identifier parameter (`permissionGroupId`). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like `create-permission-group` and `delete-permission-group`.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to update vs. create or delete. Prerequisites (e.g., needing the `permissionGroupId` from a prior list/get operation) are not mentioned, and there are no usage conditions or exclusions.

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