macos_screenshot_clipboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the interactive selection behavior, which is useful, but lacks details on permissions (e.g., screen recording access), whether it requires user interaction, error handling, or what happens if the clipboard is overwritten. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core functionality ('Take a screenshot and copy to clipboard') and adds necessary detail ('interactive selection') without any wasted words. Every part of the sentence earns its place.

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 has 0 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate by stating the action and selection method. However, it lacks details on behavioral aspects like permissions or error handling, which are important for a screenshot tool, making it incomplete for optimal agent use.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description appropriately adds context about the interactive selection process, which isn't captured in the schema, providing value beyond the structured fields.

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 action ('Take a screenshot and copy to clipboard') and specifies the selection method ('interactive selection'), which distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'macos_screenshot' that likely takes a full-screen or window screenshot without specifying clipboard copying. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential other screenshot tools that might also copy to clipboard but with different selection modes.

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 usage when an interactive screenshot selection is needed and the result should go to the clipboard, as opposed to saving to a file. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'macos_screenshot' (which likely saves to a file) or 'macos_clipboard_write' (for other clipboard operations), leaving some ambiguity for the agent.

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