auto_paste

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

The warning 'injects text into the focused window' discloses a key side effect. Since no annotations are provided, this description compensates well by highlighting destructive behavior and the return of diagnostic data.

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 concise, with five well-structured sentences. It front-loads the core purpose and immediately follows with output description, use case, and a critical warning—no unnecessary words.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential purpose, output, recommended use case, and a behavioral warning. It is fairly complete for a simple tool with two optional parameters.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description does not add semantic value beyond the schema. It restates defaults (e.g., 'defaults to "wtest"') but provides no additional context on parameter usage or constraints.

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 'Execute the auto-paste flow against an explicit candidate chain' and mentions returning diagnostic data. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on an explicit chain versus individual paste strategies or transcript pasting.

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 says 'Useful for stress-testing fallback behavior,' implying when to use it, but does not specify when not to use it or mention alternative tools among the siblings.

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