sassy_edit_multi

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden, and it excellently discloses key behaviors: edits are applied in order, each must have exactly one match, protected paths are refused, and content is snapshotted to _DELETE_/ before changes. This goes well beyond a simple 'apply edits' statement.

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 concise, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence contributes new information: format, ordering, matching constraint, and safety behavior. It is well-structured and free of redundancy.

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 complete for the tool's complexity: it covers the edit format, application order, match requirements, safety restrictions, and snapshot behavior. Since an output schema exists, return value details are not required. The description provides enough context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It thoroughly explains the 'edits' parameter with a JSON format example and constraints (each must have exactly one match). The 'path' parameter is not explicitly described but is obvious from the tool name and context. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Apply') and resource ('multiple edits to a file'), and distinguishes it from simpler edit tools by emphasizing the 'in one call' batch capability. The format explanation further clarifies the 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 clear context for when to use the tool (applying multiple edits in one call) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. It does not reference sibling tools like sassy_edit_block, but the purpose statement inherently guides the user toward batch editing scenarios.

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