pmg_action_bcc_update

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the mutation nature, dry-run behavior, confirm execution, and partial update pattern. Doesn't cover error handling or response format details, but core behaviors are transparent.

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?

Two efficient sentences plus a code-like note. Front-loaded with purpose and distinguishes from sibling. Every part is necessary.

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 7 parameters and existence of output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, behaviors, and key usage notes. Could mention response format or error cases, but not required since output schema exists.

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%. Description adds value by explaining the id_ source, partial update semantics for nullable fields, and the confirm parameter's role. This goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 identifies the tool as updating a BCC action object in the PMG RuleDB, distinguishes it from the create sibling (pmg_action_bcc_create), and specifies the source for the id_ parameter.

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?

Provides clear guidance on dry-run default, confirm flag to execute, and the partial update behavior (only non-None fields sent). Explicitly contrasts with creation tool. Could mention when to use other update tools, but sibling context makes this less critical.

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