pmg_when_group_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the mutation nature, dry-run vs. confirm behavior, and the JSON return value on execution. It also notes the config requirement. Minor omissions: no mention of error conditions or permissions, but overall adequate.

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 concise, with 4 sentences that are front-loaded with 'MUTATION (LOW)' and include key information without redundancy. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool's complexity (6 params, mutation, output schema), the description covers the primary purpose, execution modes, return values, related tools, and configuration requirements. No major gaps identified.

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% with all parameters described. The description adds value by explaining the confirm parameter's role (dry-run by default) and overall context, which supplements the schema descriptions. Baseline 3 plus extra context justifies a 4.

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 it creates a PMG RuleDB 'when' object group, specifies it's a mutation (MUTATION (LOW)), and distinguishes from sibling tools by referencing related operations (pmg_when_object_add, pmg_when_groups_list).

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 explains the dry-run default behavior, how to execute with confirm=True, and provides related tool names for adding objects and listing groups. It also mentions the required PROXIMO_PMG_* config, giving context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare to alternatives like pmg_when_group_update.

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