Set Clipboard

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering key behavioral traits. The description adds 'replacing its current content', which is consistent with idempotency but does not reveal additional side effects or behaviors beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise—one sentence of 12 words—with no unnecessary information. It front-loads the key action and resource.

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 (one parameter, idempotent write), the description is largely complete. An output schema exists, so the lack of return value explanation is acceptable. However, it could mention that the clipboard is overwritten immediately and that the operation is safe (non-destructive, idempotent) for better completeness.

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 describes the single 'text' parameter with a 100% coverage of its description. The description does not add new meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Write text'), the target ('system clipboard'), and the effect ('replacing its current content'). It succinctly conveys the tool's purpose and implicitly distinguishes it from 'get_clipboard' which reads the clipboard.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_clipboard'. It does not mention conditions, limitations, or specific contexts where this tool is appropriate.

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