clipboard_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It openly flags the operation as sensitive, warns about possible user confirmation, and explains a specific scenario where the tool will be refused. This is strong behavioral transparency, though it omits details about return behavior on denial.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes only essential caveats. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundant restatements of the tool name.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the primary action and key constraints. However, the complete omission of the 'format' parameter leaves a significant gap in understanding how the tool behaves with different inputs, so it is merely adequate.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It fails to mention the 'format' parameter entirely, leaving its meaning and impact undisclosed beyond the bare schema enum. The agent cannot infer which format to request or the resulting output behavior.

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 verb 'Read' and resource 'clipboard', distinguishing it from sibling clipboard_set and clipboard_paste. It also adds context about sensitivity and a specific refusal condition, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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 about when the tool may require confirmation and explicitly states when it will be refused (password field focus). However, it does not name alternatives or explicitly state 'use this when...', so it falls short of a 5.

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