quick_search_replace

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that replacement is global ('all occurrences'), but does not mention that the file is modified in place, potential side effects, permission requirements, or the external access approval caveat. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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 sentence with a redundant 'SEARCH & REPLACE' label, but it is concise and front-loaded. Every word earns its place, though it could benefit from more detail without becoming bloated.

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 tool has five parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, what happens if no matches are found, or how it differs from the sibling 'replace_in_file'. The lack of behavioral context makes it insufficient for an agent to select and invoke confidently.

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 schema has 100% description coverage for all five parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a little context by mentioning 'string or Regex pattern', which aligns with the 'searchPattern' parameter, but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already 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 the tool searches for a string or regex pattern and replaces all occurrences in a file. It identifies the specific action and resource, but does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'replace_in_file', which likely serves a similar purpose.

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 alternatives like 'replace_in_file' or 'edit_code'. The description only states what the tool does, not when it is preferred or what prerequisites exist.

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