regex_replace

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the core behavior (find and replace with capture group support). However, it omits details like default global flag, error handling for invalid patterns, or whether the replacement is case-sensitive. The description is adequate but not richly transparent.

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 concise sentences with no redundant information. The description is front-loaded with the main purpose and adds a key feature. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple utility with full schema parameter descriptions, the description is minimally complete. However, without an output schema, the agent does not know the return format (e.g., replaced string or count). Lack of examples or error behavior are gaps.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds that capture group references are supported, but this is already detailed in the replacement parameter description. It does not add new semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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 'find and replace text using a regex pattern', which is a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like regex_test (testing) and regex_explain (explanation). However, it could be more precise by explicitly saying 'performs regex substitution'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings like regex_test or regex_debug. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusion criteria. The description implies usage but does not offer explicit contextual guidance.

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