replace_regex

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions the replacement condition but omits critical details such as whether the operation is destructive, required permissions, error handling when occurrence count doesn't match, or any side effects on file state.

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, making it concise. However, it is overly terse and does not front-load essential information like the tool's primary function beyond what the name implies. Additional context could be added without sacrificing conciseness.

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 11 parameters and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not explain the return value (output schema exists but not referenced), error conditions, or advanced options. A more comprehensive description is needed for correct tool invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only implicitly references the 'expected_occurrences' parameter but fails to explain other key parameters like 'pattern', 'replacement', 'path', or flags such as 'case_sensitive' and 'dotall'. This leaves significant gaps in parameter understanding.

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 states it replaces regex matches conditionally based on occurrence count. It clearly specifies the resource (regex matches) and the verb (replace), distinguishing it from literal or block replacements among siblings. However, it could be more explicit about the exact behavior when the count does not match.

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 replace_literal or replace_block. The description implies a conditional regex replacement but fails to provide explicit scenarios or exclusions, leaving the agent without clear decision criteria.

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