cut_selected_items

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is known. The description adds the clipboard behavior, which clarifies the tool is a move rather than a delete. However, it does not disclose that the original items are removed from their current location or that the clipboard contents are overwritten, though these are implied by 'cut'. The description adds minimal context beyond the annotation.

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 sentence with no filler. It states the action, target, and destination in under ten words. This is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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-parameter, straightforward operation, the description is sufficient. It communicates the action and the clipboard destination. It does not explicitly state that a selection is required, but this is implied by the name and is a common prerequisite for such tools. No output schema is needed for a side-effect operation, and the destructive hint covers risk.

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 has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100% (empty). There is nothing to explain about parameters. With no parameters, a baseline of 4 is appropriate; the description does not need to provide additional parameter context.

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 clearly states the verb 'cut' and the resource 'selected items', with the result 'to clipboard'. It distinguishes from delete (removes without clipboard) and copy (keeps original), though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives. The purpose is unambiguous for an agent.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus copy_selected_items or paste_items. The use case is implied by the name and description, but there is no mention of when not to use it or prerequisites like having a selection. It does not name sibling alternatives, so the agent must infer the correct context.

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