Write Clipboard

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows this is a destructive operation. The description adds that the clipboard content is replaced and that the replacement is plain text, which implies loss of any rich formatting. This is useful context but not deeply rich behavioral detail beyond what destructiveHint already signals.

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?

A single sentence with no filler words. The core action 'Replace' is front-loaded, and every word earns its place.

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 single-parameter tool with destructive annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior adequately. It could mention the counterpart read_clipboard or permission implications, but those are secondary for such a simple clipboard write.

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 100%, with the 'text' parameter already described as 'Clipboard text.' The description's 'plain text' phrasing slightly reinforces that text is a plain string but adds little new meaning beyond the schema.

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 states a specific operation ('Replace'), the target resource ('system clipboard'), and the format of the new content ('plain text'). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling read_clipboard and from text-entry tools like type or set_value.

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 implies when to use this tool—whenever the agent needs to set the system clipboard—but it does not explicitly state this or contrast with alternatives like read_clipboard. No exclusions or conditional guidance are provided.

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