Clipboard

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false; the description is consistent with that (it can mutate, and 'replace' clarifies the write is an overwrite, not an append). It does not say what the read mode returns or whether the prior clipboard content is recoverable, so it adds only moderate value 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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the read/write rule front-loaded immediately after the purpose statement. Every clause 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?

With only two parameters and full schema coverage, the description covers what an agent needs to call the tool. The one gap is the return behavior in read mode, which is not described and there is no output schema to compensate.

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%, so both parameters are already documented, including the omit-to-read semantics for 'text' and the pointer to mobile_list_available_devices for 'device'. The description restates rather than extends this, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific resource (the device clipboard) and both verbs it supports (read or replace), which is exactly the dual-mode behavior an agent needs to recognize. No sibling tool touches the clipboard, so no differentiation is required.

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?

It explicitly states the selection rule between the two modes: 'Pass text to set the clipboard, omit it to read the current clipboard.' That is clear operational context, though it names no alternatives or preconditions (e.g. device availability).

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