Drop files or data

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

The annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds context that it simulates an external drag event, which is useful. No contradictions or hidden side effects are mentioned.

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 a single, focused sentence with no unnecessary details. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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?

The description covers the core functionality and parameters, but could be enhanced by noting potential constraints (e.g., that the target must be a drop zone). Still, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand the tool's purpose.

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?

All three parameters have clear descriptions with a concrete example for 'data'. The schema covers 100% of parameters. However, the relationship between 'data' and 'paths' (e.g., whether they can be used together) is not clarified, slightly reducing completeness.

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 action (drop), the payload (files or MIME-typed data), and the target (an element), and distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_drag (in-page dragging) and browser_file_upload (file input).

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 implies usage for simulating external drag-and-drop but does not explicitly compare with alternatives such as browser_drag or browser_file_upload, nor does it state conditions for choosing this tool.

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