Skip to main content
Glama
eva-wanxin-git

Windows Automation MCP Server

clear_clipboard

Clear sensitive or outdated data from your Windows clipboard to maintain privacy and prevent accidental pasting of unwanted content.

Instructions

清空剪贴板

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function for the clear_clipboard tool. It uses PowerShell to set the clipboard value to $null, effectively clearing it, and returns a success message or error.
    async clearClipboard() {
      try {
        await execAsync('powershell -Command "Set-Clipboard -Value $null"', {
          shell: 'powershell.exe'
        });
        return { success: true, message: '剪贴板已清空' };
      } catch (error) {
        return { success: false, error: error.message };
      }
    }
  • The tool definition object that registers 'clear_clipboard' in the getToolDefinitions() method, including name, description, and empty input schema (no parameters required).
      {
        name: 'clear_clipboard',
        description: '清空剪贴板',
        inputSchema: {
          type: 'object',
          properties: {},
        },
      },
    ];
  • The input schema definition for clear_clipboard, which is an empty object since no input parameters are required.
    inputSchema: {
      type: 'object',
      properties: {},
    },
  • The switch case in executeTool() that dispatches calls to the clear_clipboard handler.
    case 'clear_clipboard':
      return await this.clearClipboard();
  • The tools array used in canHandle() to check if clear_clipboard is supported.
    const tools = ['get_clipboard', 'set_clipboard', 'clear_clipboard'];
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. '清空剪贴板' implies a destructive mutation (clearing), but doesn't specify whether this requires special permissions, if the action is reversible, what happens to multiple clipboard formats, or if there are any side effects. For a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is maximally concise - a single phrase that communicates the core action. There's zero wasted language or unnecessary elaboration. Given the tool's simple purpose, this is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'success' looks like (does it return confirmation?), what errors might occur (e.g., if clipboard is empty or inaccessible), or system-specific considerations. The simplicity of having zero parameters doesn't compensate for the lack of behavioral context needed for safe invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% (empty schema). With no parameters to document, the baseline is 4. The description appropriately doesn't attempt to explain nonexistent parameters, though it could theoretically mention that no configuration options are available.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description '清空剪贴板' (Clear clipboard) clearly states the verb ('clear') and resource ('clipboard'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_clipboard' and 'set_clipboard' by specifying the destructive action. However, it doesn't explicitly mention what 'clipboard' refers to (system clipboard vs. application-specific), which prevents a perfect score.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing clipboard access), when it's appropriate (e.g., after copying sensitive data), or what happens to clipboard contents (permanently lost vs. recoverable). It simply states the action without context.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/eva-wanxin-git/windows-automation-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server