edit_cell

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

Discloses a key behavioral trait: editing a code cell clears its outputs and execution_count. This is valuable since no annotations are provided. Could mention other side effects like mutation, but the given side effect is sufficient.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then a behavioral note and alternative recommendation. 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?

Covers purpose, alternative, and a key side effect, but lacks parameter descriptions and return value information (no output schema). Given the complexity (3 params, mutation tool), it could be more complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain parameters. It only implies the role of 'source' via the main action, but 'path' and 'index' are not described at all. The agent must infer their meaning from context.

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 a cell's ENTIRE source'. It differentiates from the sibling patch_cell by noting 'For small changes prefer patch_cell', indicating a distinct use case.

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?

Explicitly recommends patch_cell for small changes, guiding when to use this tool versus an alternative. Does not elaborate on other contexts or prerequisites, but the core guidance is present.

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