Replace Document With Markdown

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

The description describes a destructive operation — 'Replace the main note content' — but the annotations declare destructiveHint=false, which is a direct contradiction. The description also fails to disclose that existing content will be overwritten and lost, and it does not mention the behaviors of strict or allowEmpty.

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, concise sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the verb 'Replace' and immediately communicates the action and target.

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?

Despite having an output schema and annotations, the description is too minimal for a tool with 5 parameters. It does not explain the crucial behavioral consequences (e.g., data loss), the meaning of 'strict', or the implications of 'allowEmpty'. The contradiction with the annotations further undermines its completeness.

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 description coverage is 80% (4 of 5 parameters have descriptions), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema; the 'strict' parameter remains entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

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 the specific verb 'Replace' and clearly identifies the target as 'the main note content of a document' with 'markdown content.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like append_markdown (which adds) and create_doc_from_markdown (which creates a new document).

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as append_markdown or create_doc_from_markdown. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or any context that would help an agent choose this tool over others.

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