regex_regex_split

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and return type, omitting details like default maxsplit behavior, how flags are interpreted, and edge cases (e.g., empty pattern).

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 very concise—one sentence—and front-loads the core action. However, it could benefit from a slightly expanded structure (e.g., listing parameters briefly) without becoming verbose.

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?

With 4 parameters (2 required) and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain maxsplit semantics, flag options, or return format (though output schema exists). Given the tool's complexity, more detail is needed for complete understanding.

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 description does not explain any parameters beyond the property names in the schema. It does not clarify the meaning or constraints of maxsplit or flags, nor does it provide examples of acceptable values. With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds no value.

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 splits text by a regex pattern and returns a list of strings. Among sibling regex tools (findall, match, search, replace), splitting is a distinct operation, so the differentiation is clear.

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 implies usage for splitting text by regex but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like regex_regex_findall or regex_regex_search. There is no mention of maxsplit or flags behavior.

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