get_clipboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one piece of real context — that only text content is returned, implying image clipboard contents are out of scope — but says nothing about empty-clipboard behavior or how the value is returned.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; appropriately sized for a zero-parameter read. It is terse to the point of omitting any routing or return-value detail, which is a completeness issue rather than a verbosity one.

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 no-argument, read-only accessor with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns at a high level ('text content'). A mention of what happens when the clipboard is empty or non-text would make it fully 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no input is needed to read the current clipboard.

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current clipboard text content'), which is unambiguous on its own. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like list_clipboard_history, paste_from_history, or set_clipboard, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is only implied by the get/set naming symmetry with set_clipboard and the presence of list_clipboard_history/paste_from_history. There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus reading history or pasting directly, and no exclusions.

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