read_clipboard_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only states the basic read/OCR function. It does not disclose what happens if the clipboard lacks an image, whether clipboard content is modified, or what the return format is.

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, information-dense sentence with no filler or redundant content, making it concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is simple with two optional parameters, but the absence of an output schema and annotations means the description should mention return format or prerequisites (e.g., clipboard must contain an image). The current description is partially complete but lacks these contextual details.

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 already documents both parameters completely (100% coverage), so the description adds no additional parameter context. A baseline of 3 is appropriate given the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 (read from system clipboard and OCR) and the resource (clipboard image), and it distinguishes itself from sibling URL-reading tools by focusing on clipboard source.

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 context is implied (use when an image is in the clipboard and you need OCR), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of exclusions such as whether it works with non-image clipboard content.

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