replace_page_code

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

With no annotations, the description discloses the default publish behavior, which is a key side effect. However, it does not mention other behavioral traits like irreversibility, authorization needs, or that it modifies the page permanently.

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 sentence with two concise clauses, front-loading the core purpose. No wasted words.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description provides minimal context: it does not explain return values, error behavior, or whether this tool only works on T123 page type. The mention of 'T123' is ambiguous for agents unfamiliar with Tilda.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters. The description does not add new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 (replace text with regex), the resource (HTML code blocks of a T123 page), and provides an example (third-party scripts/trackers). It distinguishes itself from siblings like replace_zero_links and publish_page.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description gives a use case example but does not mention when not to use it or compare with sibling tools.

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