Syncretica MCP Server

update_god

Modify an existing deity's name, themes, description, or pantheon assignment to keep mythological catalog records accurate and current.

Instructions

Update an existing deity's attributes, pantheon, or thematic tags.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "update_god"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	God ID
`name`	No	Updated deity name
`themes`	No	Updated themes
`description`	No	Updated description
`pantheon_id`	No	Reassign to a different pantheon ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full burden for a mutation tool and falls well short. It never says whether this is a partial update (omitted fields left untouched) or a full replacement, whether the change is reversible, what permissions or ownership are required, or what happens when the id does not exist.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single well-formed sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though the brevity contributes to the vagueness noted elsewhere rather than being a model of precision.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Scored relative to complexity: five flat parameters with full schema coverage and no output schema, so the schema does most of the explanatory work. Still, for an update tool the absence of any statement about partial-update semantics leaves a meaningful gap an agent would need to guess at.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters including the required id are already documented, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds little beyond the schema and actually omits the description field while grouping name/themes under the vague term "attributes".

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb+resource ("Update an existing deity") and enumerates the mutable facets: attributes, pantheon, and thematic tags. That distinguishes it from create_god and delete_god by the word "existing", though no sibling is named explicitly and "attributes" stays vague relative to the actual schema fields.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no routing to alternatives such as update_myth or update_pantheon for adjacent entities. The only implicit cue is "existing", which hints at a precondition (the deity must already exist) but never states it.

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