Apply targeted text replacements in an existing file, automatically creating a backup for safe recovery.
Apply targeted text replacements in an existing file with backups.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | ||
| old_text | No | ||
| new_text | No | ||
| replace_all | No | ||
| edits | No | ||
| ctx | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.3.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided. The description only mentions backups but does not disclose replacement behavior, permissions, or side effects.
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 very short (one sentence) but under-specified given the tool's complexity with 6 parameters.
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?
The description is incomplete, lacking parameter explanations and contextual details despite having an output schema.
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 adds no meaning to any of the 6 parameters, including the required path.
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 tool does 'targeted text replacements in an existing file' and mentions backups, distinguishing it from write_file and delete_file.
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 on when or when not to use this tool compared to siblings like write_file or delete_file.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.