batch_replace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the operation is for text substitution only and produces a new file (non-destructive). However, it omits details like permissions needed, error cases (e.g., file not found), or whether substitutions are case-sensitive.

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 no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core purpose and constraints, making it easy for an agent to parse.

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 creates a new file with multiple replacements, the description is too brief. It does not address edge cases, behavior on overlapping replacements, or return value (despite having an output schema). Siblings like search_and_replace likely offer more context, making this feel incomplete.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the three parameters (path, out_path, replacements). The phrase 'find->replace pairs' loosely maps to the replacements object, but does not clarify the mapping or format. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema structure.

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 specifies the verb 'Apply', the resource 'multiple find->replace pairs', and important qualifiers: 'to a NEW file' and 'text substitution only'. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_and_replace or preview_batch_replace.

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 implies usage for creating a new file with substitutions applied, but does not explicitly state when not to use or suggest alternatives. The context of working on a 'NEW file' provides some guidance, but lacks exclusions like 'do not use on existing open documents'.

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