Set Clipboard

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It never says that writing replaces whatever is currently on the clipboard, whether it requires an active display/X session, or what happens on failure — the destructive overwrite of existing clipboard state is the key omission.

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?

One short sentence with the action front-loaded and zero filler. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity leaves no room for the behavioral caveats noted above.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the single required string parameter is trivial. What is missing for a state-mutating clipboard tool with no annotations is the overwrite/replace semantics and any environment prerequisites.

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 description coverage is 0%, but the single parameter is named 'text' with type string and no format constraints, so there is little semantic depth to add. The description's use of "text" is consistent with the schema but contributes nothing beyond it, such as size limits or newline handling.

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?

"Write text to the clipboard" pairs a specific verb (write) with a specific resource (clipboard), which cleanly separates it from the sibling get_clipboard. It stops short of explicitly naming the read counterpart, but the direction of the operation is unambiguous.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative. The closest thing to guidance is the implied read/write split against get_clipboard, which the agent must infer from the verb alone.

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