write_clipboard

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates that the tool writes text and does not mention that existing clipboard contents are overwritten, whether any return value is produced, or whether system clipboard access is required.

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 with no wasted words. It states the action and target immediately, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool with no output schema, this is a minimally viable description. However, it lacks behavioral context such as overwriting the clipboard, platform expectations, or any side effects, leaving an agent without full confidence about the operation's exact behavior.

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%, so the description must compensate, but the single parameter is named 'text' and its purpose is obvious from the sentence 'Write text to the clipboard.' The description does not add meaningful detail beyond the schema, but the parameter is simple enough that this is not a major gap.

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 ('Write') with a clear resource ('text to the clipboard'), so the core action is unambiguous. It is distinguishable from the sibling read_clipboard by its antonymic purpose, though it does not explicitly name or contrast that sibling.

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 provides no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as read_clipboard, set_value, or perform_action. It does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions that should lead an agent to choose this tool.

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