patch_cell

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

Without annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: the uniqueness constraint, the error handling (asking for more context), diffs kept small, and clearing outputs on code cells. This is comprehensive 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 four sentences, well-structured, with the purpose first. No unnecessary information, every sentence adds value.

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?

While the description covers purpose and key behaviors, it lacks parameter descriptions and return value information. Given the complexity and no output schema, it is incomplete.

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?

Description mentions 'old' and 'new' substrings implicitly, but does not explain the 'path' and 'index' parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should define all parameters; it fails to do so.

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 unique old substring with new') and the resource ('cell'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the 'preferred edit tool' for this specific operation.

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?

The description implies when to use this tool (for precise substring replacement) and notes constraints ('old must occur exactly once'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it compared to other edit tools like edit_cell.

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