pmg_what_object_update

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

No annotations provided, but description includes mutation label, dry-run behavior, confirm flag, API path, and field mapping conventions (only non-None fields sent). Sufficient for understanding basic behavior, though idempotency not addressed.

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?

Single paragraph but well-structured with key information front-loaded. Contains necessary details without excessive verbosity. Could be slightly more structured but is clear.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need not be explained. Description covers prerequisites, default behavior, field mappings, and parameter sources. Lacks mention of error handling or concurrency, but overall adequate for a medium-complexity mutation tool.

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 only 8% (only proximo_target described). Description adds meaning for ogroup, type_, id_ with cross-references to other tools, and explains field name mappings. However, many parameters like field, value, filename, spamlevel, contenttype, and confirm are not explained beyond schema names.

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?

Clearly states 'update an object in a PMG RuleDB 'what' object group' with verb and resource. Includes API path and distinguishes from sibling tools like pmg_what_object_add and pmg_what_object_delete.

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?

Explicitly mentions dry-run by default and confirm=True to execute, and requires PROXIMO_PMG_* config. Provides context for when to use but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare with alternatives.

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