pt_get_clipboard

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. The word 'Read' explicitly signals a non-mutating operation, which covers the read-only aspect. However, it does not disclose edge cases like empty clipboard handling or whether retrieval is limited to plain text, leaving some ambiguity.

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 sentence of ten words, front-loaded with the action 'Read the current contents'. It is immediately scannable and free of unnecessary details.

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 and the schema covering parameters, the description is mostly complete. However, without an output schema or explicit mention of return type, an agent might not know exactly what to expect (e.g., a string, null if empty), but this is a minor gap for a simple getter.

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 fully documents the single optional 'udid' parameter with a description explaining it uses the active device when omitted. The tool description adds no parameter-specific information, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline 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 uses the specific verb 'Read' with resource 'clipboard/pasteboard', clearly distinguishing it from the sibling write tool pt_set_clipboard. It leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 or how it relates to alternatives. It does not mention conditions like 'use this to retrieve clipboard content before asserting text' or contrast with pt_set_clipboard. Usage must be inferred entirely from the name and simple wording.

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