sed_multifile

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the core action but doesn't describe important behavioral traits: whether this is a destructive operation (implied by 'Apply sed pattern' but not explicit), what happens on errors, whether it shows previews before applying changes, or any rate limits. The description is minimal and lacks critical context for safe usage.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core functionality, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 the complexity of a batch text-editing tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., success/failure status, modified file list), error handling, or safety considerations like the backup parameter's effect. For a potentially destructive operation, more context is needed.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents all 4 parameters. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific semantics beyond what's in the schema—it doesn't explain how the pattern interacts with filePattern or directory, or clarify backup behavior. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 the action ('Apply sed pattern') and target ('to multiple files matching a glob pattern'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish this tool from sibling tools like sed_edit or quick_replace, which likely have overlapping functionality for text editing.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sed_edit, quick_replace, or perl_edit. It mentions the scope ('multiple files matching a glob pattern') but doesn't specify when this batch operation is preferred over single-file edits or other text processing tools.

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