clipboard_image

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds what they cannot: it reads but does not modify the clipboard, has an external dependency (wl-paste or xclip on Linux), and writes to the temp folder. These are real behavioral disclosures, though the failure behavior when the clipboard is empty is not stated.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and destination, then the trigger, then exclusions, then caveats. Every sentence adds something an agent needs, and nothing is redundant with the empty schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description fills the gap by naming the return values (PNG path, size, preview), which is what the agent needs to chain into annotate. Only the empty-clipboard/no-tool-installed failure mode is left implicit.

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?

Zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantics to compensate for; the baseline of 4 applies. The description usefully notes that the result is a PNG path despite there being no inputs.

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?

Specific verb and resource: save the clipboard image as a PNG in the temp folder. It also notes the downstream goal (annotate) and distinguishes itself from file-path handling in siblings annotate/locate.

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?

Explicit trigger: 'when the user says they copied a screenshot'. It also names the alternative route ('for a file they sent, pass its path to annotate or locate directly'), which is exactly the branch an agent must decide against.

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