clipboard_read

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context: ordering ('newest first'), pagination ('next_start'), and page semantics ('one page'), which are not captured in annotations and help the agent understand runtime behavior.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose first. Each sentence earns its place: definition, parameter examples, and pagination guidance. No redundancy or fluff.

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?

Combined with safety annotations and an output schema, the description covers essential aspects: what the tool does, how to invoke it with meaningful parameters, and how to paginate. The mention of 'next_start' implies the output contains a pagination field, filling a key operational gap.

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 coverage is only 33%, but the description compensates for two of three parameters: count is tied to user intent ('when the user says they copied N things') and start is illustrated with an example. The tab parameter is not explained, but its default and sibling context reduce ambiguity.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('one page of CopyQ text history') with scope ('newest first'), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like clipboard_search and clipboard_tabs. It leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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?

Provides explicit parameter usage examples ('Use count=N when the user says they copied N things', 'Use start=4,count=1 for the fifth item') and pagination guidance ('Follow next_start when later rows are needed'). Does not explicitly mention alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for selection.

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