dashy_replace_config

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description explains that the operation is a complete overwrite and requires a full config object, adding context about the tool's effect. It doesn't discuss backups or irreversibility in detail, but the annotation covers the destructive nature.

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 sentences, direct and information-dense. The first sentence states the action, the second clarifies requirements and behavior. No wasted words.

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 an output schema present and the description covering the core behavior, parameter requirements, and destructive nature, the tool is well-defined. The distinction from merge operations provides sufficient context for an agent to select it correctly.

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 adds meaning to the config parameter by listing required top-level keys (pageInfo, appConfig, sections, pages), which is absent from the schema. However, the filename parameter is not mentioned in the description, and schema coverage is 0%, so some semantics remain undocumented.

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 uses a specific verb 'Replace' and identifies the resource 'entire Dashy config file'. It also clarifies the scope with 'complete overwrite, not a merge', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like set_key or update_section.

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?

It states the config must be a full config object and emphasizes 'complete overwrite, not a merge', which guides when to use this tool over partial-update siblings. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for partial changes.

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