clipboard_paste

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses a key side effect: the clipboard is modified and then restored, which is critical for the agent to know. It doesn't cover failure modes or the restore=false scenario, but the main behavior is clearly revealed.

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 with no redundant words. The first sentence states purpose and mechanism; the second gives usage guidance. Perfectly succinct.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, mechanism, a usage guideline, and the crucial clipboard restore behavior. It lacks explicit mention of the restore parameter's optionality and potential failure conditions, but these are minor given the tool's complexity.

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 has 0% property descriptions, so the description must compensate. It indirectly explains the 'text' parameter and the 'restore' parameter ('then restore the previous clipboard'), but it doesn't state that restore can be set to false or what that changes. This is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 a specific action ('Paste text into the focused app') with a precise mechanism ('via clipboard + Cmd+V') and distinguishes itself from sibling 'keyboard_type' by noting it is preferred for long text.

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?

It explicitly says 'Preferred over keyboard_type for long text,' giving a clear alternative and a context for use. It does not mention when not to use it, but the guidance is sufficient for choosing between the two tools.

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