text_replace

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only mentions regex handling. It does not state whether all occurrences are replaced, how the replace parameter behaves when omitted, or what the return value looks like. This leaves significant behavioral gaps for a mutation tool.

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 that is front-loaded and easy to parse. It wastes no words, though it could benefit from a bit more detail on replacement semantics. The structure is appropriate for the tool's simplicity.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too minimal. It fails to explain return values, whether replacement is global, or how to use the tool effectively among many siblings. The description is insufficient for an agent to understand the full tool behavior.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to 'find' and 'use_regex' by explaining regex behavior, but it does not explain the 'replace' parameter or its default behavior. This is partial compensation for a 4-parameter tool, but not complete.

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 the tool performs text find-and-replace, which is a specific verb+resource. Mentioning regex behavior helps distinguish it from sibling tools like text_filter or text_dedup. However, it does not explicitly clarify that it replaces occurrences, leaving slight ambiguity about the core operation.

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. It does not mention exclusions, such as when to prefer regex_tool or other text manipulation tools. The only hint is the regex flag, but no context is given about suitable use cases.

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