Syncretica MCP Server

update_myth

Updates an existing myth's structured theme propositions by ID, letting you revise key-value proposition maps in cross-cultural mythological datasets.

Instructions

Update an existing myth's structured theme propositions.

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>",
      "themes": "<themes>"
    },
    "name": "update_myth"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Myth ID
`themes`	Yes	Updated key-value map of myth propositions

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden for a mutation tool, and it discloses almost nothing. It does not say whether the supplied themes map replaces the existing propositions or merges into them, whether other propositions are dropped, or whether the change is reversible — the single most consequential unknown for a partial-update tool.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with zero padding; every word carries information. Brevity here is efficient rather than evasive, though the same length budget could have been spent on the merge-versus-replace question.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The tool is simple (2 params, no output schema) and the schema is fully described, so the description is close to sufficient for invocation. However, for a nested-object mutation with no annotations, the undefined replace/merge behavior of the themes map is a material omission that an agent would need in order to call it safely.

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% ('Myth ID', 'Updated key-value map of myth propositions'), so the parameters are already documented and the baseline is 3. The description's phrase 'structured theme propositions' loosely corroborates that themes are string key-value pairs but adds no constraint, format, or replacement semantics beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Update an existing myth') and narrows the target to 'structured theme propositions', so an agent can distinguish it from delete_myth, create_myth, or update_god. It stops short of naming a sibling or spelling out scope boundaries, but the verb+resource+field combination is unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus create_myth or the other update_* siblings, and no prerequisites such as whether the myth must already exist or whether themes must be complete. 'Existing' hints that the myth must pre-exist, but nothing tells the agent how to choose this tool over alternatives.

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