find_and_replace

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

The description only states the basic action and return value. It does not disclose whether the operation applies to the whole document, selection, or specific scope; nor does it mention case sensitivity, regex support, or side effects. With no annotations provided, this is a significant gap.

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 short and includes structured Args/Returns sections. It is not excessive, but it could be more compact while adding necessary details. No front-loaded summary beyond the first sentence.

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 the simple input schema and existence of an output schema, the description omits crucial context like scope of replacement, whether it operates on selection, case sensitivity, and interaction with undo/protection. This leaves the agent underinformed for reliable 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. However, it merely repeats the parameter names ('Text to find', 'Text to replace with') without adding format, constraints, or behavioral context. This adds minimal value beyond the schema itself.

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 the action 'Find and replace text in the current document,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'find_text' (search only) and 'batch_replace' (likely batch 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'batch_replace' or 'search_text'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context limitations, or exclusions, leaving the agent without decision support.

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