search_and_replace

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

Without annotations, the description only reveals that literal and regex patterns are supported. It fails to disclose that the tool modifies files, potential side effects (e.g., irreversible changes), performance implications, or required permissions.

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 very short (two sentences) and front-loads the core purpose. However, it is too concise, missing important details without becoming verbose.

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 mutation tool that can affect the entire vault, the description lacks crucial context: no mention of destructive nature, no output schema, no prerequisites. It is not complete enough for safe usage.

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 minimal value beyond the schema: it mentions literal/regex support (tying to pattern and isRegex), but does not explain the path parameter (how to scope to a file) or the replacement behavior. With 0% schema coverage, more detail is needed.

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 performs find and replace on text, with scope across the vault or a single file. It stands out from sibling tools which focus on file creation, deletion, or simple edits, making its purpose distinct.

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 manual editing or other search tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or exclusion criteria.

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