browser_copy_to_clipboard

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well by disclosing the key behavioral guarantee: only the character count is returned, not the content, and it copies to the system clipboard. It also flags 'CSS selectors only' as a constraint. It does not mention clipboard overwriting or element-not-found behavior, but the most critical security-relevant behavior is transparent.

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 front-loaded with the 'SECRET-SAFE' flag and the core behavior, followed by a concrete use case and constraint. The Azure example adds context and earns its place. It is slightly verbose in the second sentence, but every part contributes information.

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 simple 2-param tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is largely complete: it explains purpose, secret-safe behavior, return value (only character count), and parameter constraints. It does not describe error behavior or clipboard side effects beyond 'copy', but the described use case and output behavior are sufficient for correct invocation.

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 the baseline is 3. The description's main param-related addition, 'CSS selectors only', repeats the schema's own 'CSS selector' phrasing. It does not meaningfully extend beyond what the input schema already provides for either selector or attribute.

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 verb ('Copy') on a specific resource (an element's value/text or attribute) with a clear destination (system clipboard). It distinguishes itself from siblings like browser_get_page_content or browser_extract_token by explicitly stating content is NOT returned. The 'SECRET-SAFE' tag reinforces the unique purpose.

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 gives a concrete use case ('credentials/tokens... Azure new client secret') and specifies when to choose this tool (when the value must move to a field or CLI without entering the conversation). It implies the alternative would be returning content to the conversation, but does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions.

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