replace_values

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

With no annotations, the description carries full transparency responsibility. It usefully discloses that it appends Table.ReplaceValue (Replacer.ReplaceText) to the M query and replaces every occurrence in a column. However, it does not mention potential side effects, such as modifications to existing M steps, case sensitivity, or error behavior.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action and an informative detail about the M function. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 6-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too brief. It lacks usage guidance, parameter coverage, and essential behavioral details about prerequisites and side effects, leaving the agent under-informed for correct invocation.

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 already documents find, replace, column, and partitionName, though sessionId and table lack descriptions. The description adds a 'text value' nuance for the find parameter and clarifies the column scope, but doesn't compensate for the undocumented sessionId or table parameters. It offers only marginal value beyond the schema.

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 that the tool replaces every occurrence of a text value in a column, using a specific verb and resource. It also names the underlying M function, which adds precision. However, it doesn't explicitly distinguish itself from the similarly named sibling 'replace_value', so it isn't a perfect 5.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'replace_value' or 'transform_column'. It implies a Power Query replacement context but does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or preferred scenarios, leaving the agent to guess.

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