find_replace

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Find and replace text' without specifying whether it replaces all occurrences, returns a count, or affects formulas. This omission is significant 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?

Single sentence is concise and front-loads the core function. It is appropriately brief, but could benefit from a second sentence to clarify scope or behavior without losing conciseness.

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 full schema coverage, the description lacks context about default behavior (e.g., replace all occurrences), return values (no output schema), and the effect on formulas. For a tool with 7 parameters, this minimal description is insufficient for an agent to reliably choose and invoke it.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the tool's overall purpose. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not hinder usage but adds no value.

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?

Description states 'Find and replace text in a sheet' which clearly identifies the action and object. It distinguishes from sibling tools like read_range and write_range by specifying find-and-replace functionality. However, it could be more precise by mentioning optional scope (all sheets or a specific sheet).

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 to use this tool versus alternatives like write_range or batch_update. There is no mention of prerequisites or limitations, leaving the agent to infer usage context without explicit direction.

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