modx_virtualpage_update_event

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

With no annotations at all, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does not meet it. It never says whether the update is partial or full-replacement, whether omitted fields are cleared, whether the change is reversible, or what permissions are needed. For a mutation tool this is a significant gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Its brevity is efficient in form, though the shortness reflects under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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?

A five-parameter mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, no output schema, and no parameter documentation needs far more than one sentence. Nothing tells an agent how to safely identify the event or what the call returns.

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 description coverage is 0% for five parameters, so the description must compensate and largely fails. It mentions only id and name as the lookup keys, without stating whether they are alternatives, which wins if both are supplied, or what rank, active, and description actually do (e.g., is 'active' a 0/1 flag?).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Update a VirtualPage event"), which is far better than a tautology. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the closely named siblings modx_virtualpage_update_handler and modx_virtualpage_update_route, so an agent must infer the target object from the name alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of the sibling get/create/delete event tools, and no prerequisites such as required permissions or a need to fetch the event first. The only implied usage is 'you have an event that needs changing.'

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