edit

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals critical behavior: compilation and push, and automatic revert on compile failure. It could be richer (e.g., side effects, access requirements), but it goes beyond a basic edit description.

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, front-loaded key information, no fluff. Every word earns its place.

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, the complete lack of parameter documentation makes the tool hard to use correctly. Key behaviors like reversion and compilation are disclosed, but without parameter semantics, the description is incomplete for a 5-parameter tool.

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 0% and the description provides no parameter explanations. With 5 parameters (4 required), the description should at least mention what 'old', 'new', 'path', 'project', or 'message' represent. It adds no value for parameter understanding.

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 states a specific action: 'Replace an exact snippet, then compile and push.' It clearly differentiates from siblings like 'write' by highlighting the 'exact snippet' matching and the auto compile/push behavior. This is a strong, specific verb+resource statement.

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 provides a clear usage constraint: '`old` must appear exactly once.' This implies when the tool is appropriate (exact unique snippet) without stating exclusions. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives but gives enough context for a competent agent.

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