pmg_when_object_add

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions 'MUTATION (LOW)' indicating destructive potential, and describes dry-run vs confirm behavior. However, it doesn't detail what dry-run returns or any permission requirements.

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?

Description is very concise (3 sentences), front-loaded with the main action, and efficiently communicates purpose, key usage notes, and execution detail.

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 5 parameters, no enums, and an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, prerequisites, and execution flow. References sibling tools for context. Lacks detail on dry-run output but overall sufficient.

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%, so baseline is 3. Description adds minimal value beyond schema: it explains confirm behavior. No additional details on start/end format beyond 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?

Description clearly states the tool adds a timeframe object to a PMG RuleDB 'when' object group. It specifies it's a mutation and distinguishes from siblings like pmg_when_group_create (which creates the group) and pmg_when_object_update/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?

Provides explicit guidance: use pmg_when_group_create first if group doesn't exist, and list objects with pmg_when_group_objects. Also explains confirm=True executes, default dry-run. Could be more explicit about when not to use vs alternatives.

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