Edit File

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

Annotations already set destructiveHint=true, so the editing nature is known. Description adds that edits replace exact line sequences (preserving unmatched lines), returns a git-style diff, and works only in allowed directories. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: what it does (line-based edits), how output is returned (diff), and constraints (allowed directories). No redundant information.

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 annotations (destructiveHint=true) and output schema (present), the description provides enough context for an agent to understand functionality, output, and constraints. Could mention return type or more about the edit array structure, but adequate.

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 coverage is low (33%), with only dryRun having a description. Description explains that 'oldText' must match exactly (implying substring replacement) and that dryRun previews changes as a git-style diff, but does not detail parameter formats or constraints beyond schema.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'edit', resource 'text file', and mechanism 'line-based replacements of exact line sequences with new content'. Distinguishes from siblings like write_file (whole file overwrite) by emphasizing line-based edits and returning a git-style diff.

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?

States 'Only works within allowed directories' but does not explicitly guide when to use edit_file versus alternatives like write_file or read_file. No exclusion criteria or context for when not to use.

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