get_paste_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It communicates that the operation is a read ('Get') and that the result is the item's full content, but it does not disclose error behavior, permissions, or response formatting. This is minimal but non-zero behavioral information.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the action, target, and selection criterion without wasted words. Every part contributes to understanding.

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 simple one-parameter read tool, the description plus schema gives an agent enough to invoke it correctly with a valid ID. It would be more complete with explicit error/not-found behavior or a note on when to prefer search_clipboard, but those are not critical for basic 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?

The input schema already describes the single parameter ('The paste item ID') with 100% coverage. The description only restates that lookup is by ID and adds no additional type, format, or constraint details beyond the schema.

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 ('Get') and resource ('full content of a specific clipboard item'), with a clear retrieval-by-ID scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_clipboard or get_clipboard_stats.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving a known clipboard item by ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over search_clipboard or mention any exclusions. An agent can infer the use case but receives no direct routing guidance.

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