find_replace_text

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

Without any annotations, the description fails to disclose essential behavioral traits such as whether replacements are applied globally, whether the document is modified destructively, or any side effects. This is a critical gap 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?

The description is extremely concise with a single sentence. It is efficient but could benefit from additional structure (e.g., mentioning scope of replacement). Still, it avoids unnecessary 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?

The description does not specify whether the replace operation is global or per instance, nor does it explain return values or confirmation. For a tool with four parameters and no output schema, more context is needed for correct usage.

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 explains each parameter. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 (find and replace) and the target (text in the document). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'find_text_in_document' which only finds text, missing an opportunity to highlight the replace functionality.

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 'find_text_in_document' or when not to use it. No context on precondition or use cases is provided.

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