Write Clipboard

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

Discloses that it overwrites existing clipboard content, uses NSPasteboard with a pbcopy fallback for text only, and requires no permission. This adds substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). No contradiction exists between the description and 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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main action, followed by fallback behavior and overwrite side effect. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy.

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?

Covers purpose, implementation details, fallback behavior, overwrite side effect, and permissions. For a two-parameter tool with no output schema, this description is comprehensive and leaves no significant gaps.

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 schema already provides 100% parameter descriptions, but the description adds operational context: filePaths require the native helper and have no CLI fallback, while text has a fallback. This clarifies conditions beyond the schema's static descriptions, adding value.

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 tool replaces the system clipboard contents with text or file references. It specifies the verb 'Replace', identifies the resource (system clipboard), and distinguishes between text and file references, effectively differentiating from sibling clipboard_read.

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?

Provides clear context on when to use the tool (to set clipboard content) and important constraints: file references require the native helper, text falls back to pbcopy, and no permission is required. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the writing vs reading distinction is implicit through the sibling clipboard_read.

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