pmg_when_object_update

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

Without annotations, the description carries full weight for behavioral disclosure. It flags this as a MUTATION (MEDIUM) and describes the dry-run default and the confirm effect. However, it does not detail potential side effects, permission requirements, or the scope of changes (e.g., whether other fields are unaffected).

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 two sentences plus a parenthetical note, achieving high conciseness. It front-loads the tool type and action ('MUTATION (MEDIUM): update...') and uses clear, purposeful language without filler.

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 output schema exists (context signals), the description covers the return format on confirm. It mentions the source for id_ and the default dry-run mode. For a tool with 6 parameters, it is mostly complete, though it could hint at error handling or post-update effects.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description restates that id_ comes from pmg_when_group_objects, which is already in the schema. It adds no new semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 updates a timeframe object in a PMG RuleDB 'when' object group, specifying the exact resource (timeframe object, 'when' group). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool pmg_when_object_add, making it unambiguous which tool to use for updating vs adding.

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 default dry-run behavior and how to execute with confirm=True, and directs users to pmg_when_object_add for adding new timeframes. It also notes that id_ comes from pmg_when_group_objects, providing clear prerequisite guidance. However, it does not explicitly exclude other actions like delete.

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