set_clipboard

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, which is consistent with the copy semantics. However, the description adds nothing beyond restating the name: it does not say the previous clipboard contents are overwritten, whether the clipboard is the X11/Wayland selection, or whether a success value is returned. For a state-mutating tool it leaves the only non-obvious behavior undisclosed.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the action and free of padding. It is efficiently sized for a trivial one-parameter tool, though it is so terse that it borders on under-specification rather than genuine tightness.

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 one-parameter, non-open-world tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the essentials are present. What is missing is the one behavior an agent could get wrong: that this replaces the current clipboard contents (and thus interacts with list_clipboard_history / paste_from_history).

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?

There is one required string parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('Text to copy to clipboard'), so the schema already does the full job. The description's 'Copy text' merely mirrors it and adds no format, length, or encoding detail — baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Copy') and resource ('text to the clipboard'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling reads like get_clipboard and list_clipboard_history. It does not explicitly name those alternatives, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this versus get_clipboard, paste_from_history, or pick_color_to_clipboard — tools in the same family that also write to the clipboard. There is no context, prerequisite, or exclusion stated anywhere.

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