Your habitability is nonexistent.
Clouds are formed by water vapour (and other gases, but that's not as important, the big one for this question is water) as it condenses: this is the preparatory step before rain or snow or whatever else comes down, even if the clouds aren't always thick enough to be readily seen. If you don't have clouds, you don't have precipitation. Without precipitation, you don't have a rain cycle, which means underground water suppliers like aquifers won't be refilled; from the direction of your question, the planet has implicitly always been this way, so those aquifers likely don't exist anyways.
Now, without precipitation nor usable groundwater, it means your planet has no access to freshwater supplies. That immediately invalidates basically all land-based life as we know it on Earth, because most creatures can't drink saltwater.
This is also obviously not much of an Earth-like planet at this point, but let's keep going a little farther.
Without clouds, one of the planet's major methods of temperature control vanishes. The lack of precipitation means you have no snow, which means that the ice caps can't effectively replenish themselves in the face of incidental or seasonal melting. They probably won't melt entirely, as even saltwater freezes when it's cold enough, but they're certainly going to be pretty small. There's no defense against a sudden flare of solar activity, nor against the reverse. Ice ages will be a lot more severe.
Without rainfall, inland vegetation is simply impossible within Earth-like constraints: you need water for life, and there isn't any of that inland. You're going to have a very dull brown planet outside the oceans. This leaves the planet entirely reliant on sea life to manage the atmospheric balance of oxygen, nitrogen, CO2, etc. I can't speak with absolute certainty here, but my expectation is that that won't produce a balance like what Earth has now.
Another major point: without rainfall, it means that any water evaporation from the oceans will stay in the atmosphere. This is going to produce a nasty greenhouse gas effect, I would expect, as the atmosphere thickens (higher density) from sheer volume of gas. Atmospheric pressure will rise, which might check the process eventually; temperature and boiling point both rise with higher pressures, so it could in theory reach an equilibrium. In practice, however, that's going to be long past survivable temperatures; if the average temperature of the planet is over 100C, I'm pretty sure that fails the definition of an Earth-like planet.
Conclusion: Don't treat planetary phenomena lightly, nor in isolation, because they're usually very interconnected. You remove one piece, and you're likely to topple the entire system, with catastrophic effects. Secondary implications, like the mess that spilled out above, are not necessarily obvious, but that isn't necessary for them to be extremely nasty.
