zero_set_text

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

With no annotations, description adds the key behavioral trait of auto-publishing by default. However, it omits details on destructive nature, error handling, or whether the operation is reversible.

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 front-loads the main action, achieving conciseness. A touch more structure could improve clarity but is not severely lacking.

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?

Given 6 parameters (3 required) and no output schema, the description is too brief. Missing explanation of the 'match' parameter, selection logic between recId/match, and what 'entire model' means per page.

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%, so description adds minimal extra value. It restates the auto-publish behavior but does not explain the 'match' parameter or how find/replace interacts with recId.

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 replaces text using regex in Zero Block models and mentions auto-publishing. It distinguishes from siblings like replace_zero_links (link replacement) and zero_update_element (single element update), though scope (per page) is implicitly from schema.

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 (e.g., replace_zero_links, zero_update_element). No context on prerequisites or limitations.

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