clear_clipboard_history

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered in structured data. The description reinforces this by saying 'entire', which tells the agent that all entries at once are affected, not just one. However, it says nothing about whether clearing is irreversible, whether an undo exists, or what happens to the current clipboard if it is non-empty. Those gaps hold it below a 4.

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?

It is a single short sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and there is no unnecessary text. The 'entire' qualifier is the most important word and appears prominently.

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?

For a zero-parameter destructive tool with annotations that declare destructiveHint, the description covers scope and intent well. The only meaningful gap is the absence of a statement about irreversibility or recoverability, which matters for a wipe operation, but no output schema is needed and no parameters exist.

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?

The tool accepts zero parameters, so the description has nothing more to explain. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is a 4, and the description does not need to add anything.

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?

Population of a specific verb (wipe) and a specific resource (clipboard history), with the scope qualifier 'entire' making clear this is a bulk operation. It does not name its sibling delete_clipboard_entry, but 'entire' does implicitly distinguish it. The purpose is unmistakable.

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?

'Entire' implies the distinction from delete_clipboard_entry (single item removal), so an agent can infer when this tool is appropriate. However, there is no explicit statement of when NOT to use it, no mention of an alternative by name, and no precondition guidance (e.g., confirm before mass deletion).

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