disable_auto_paste

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the immediate effect (disables auto-paste) and the resulting mode (manual via slash commands), but it omits potential side effects, reversibility, or any prerequisites. Since this is a simple toggle, some inference is reasonable, but more explicit detail would improve transparency.

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 two sentences with no fluff. It front-loads the action and immediately explains the result, making every word earn its place. There is no redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description is nearly complete. It states the action and the resulting mode, which is enough for an agent to invoke correctly. It could mention the opposite action (enable_auto_paste) for full completeness, but that is not essential.

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, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed; the input schema is empty, and the description focuses on the action and outcome.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Disable') and resource ('automatic paste detection'). It also differentiates from siblings by explicitly mentioning the result ('manual paste mode'), making it distinct from enable_auto_paste and auto_paste_status.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you want to turn off automatic paste detection. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the sibling tool 'enable_auto_paste' provides clear contrast, and the phrase 'using slash commands only' suggests the resulting behavior is manual, which guides usage.

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