roblox_script

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: replace requires a 'unique exact' match and write enforces an 'expected_source concurrency guard'. It still omits what happens on a non-unique match, permission requirements, and failure behavior.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the four modes and followed by the key anti-pattern. No filler, and the most decision-relevant content comes first.

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?

For a 12-parameter mutation tool with 8% schema coverage and no output schema, the description is too thin. It neither compensates for the undocumented parameters nor explains per-action behavior or results, leaving the agent to guess for most inputs.

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 only 8% across 12 parameters, so the description must carry weight. It implies mappings for find (literal grep), replace (unique exact), expected_source (concurrency guard), and line-range params, but leaves root, path, offset, limit, line_count, and studio_id undocumented in both the description and 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?

The description names the four concrete operations (read a line range, literal grep, exact replacement, write with a concurrency guard), which map cleanly onto the action enum. It is clearly distinct from lookup-oriented siblings, though it never explicitly restates the resource (script) beyond the tool name.

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 closing sentence 'Never read whole codebase to locate a name' implies using grep/find instead of read for name lookups, which is useful routing guidance. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus siblings like roblox_query, roblox_get, or roblox_edit, nor prerequisites for each action.

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