hover_element

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Hover mouse over a target element' and does not mention whether the element is scrolled into view, whether it waits for the element to appear, what events are triggered, or what happens if the selector matches no element. The timeoutMs parameter implies waiting behavior, but the description does not state it.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and the target resource directly, and the key verb is front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 tool is simple, the parameter schema is fully self-explanatory, and the action is clear. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description lacks behavioral details such as wait behavior, error conditions, and return value. It is minimally viable but leaves some invocation nuances unspecified.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters clearly, including enums and defaults. The description adds no extra parameter context, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 states a specific verb ('Hover') and a clear resource ('a target element'), making the tool's function immediately obvious. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like click_element or fill_element since hovering is a unique interaction not represented elsewhere in the sibling list.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, with no mention of scenarios that call for hovering, such as triggering tooltips or hover menus, nor any exclusions or alternatives.

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