hover

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond those fields. It does not mention whether hovering triggers UI events, requires visibility, or has any side effects, leaving the agent with only the annotation safety profile.

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 short sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It is front-loaded but omits essential context, so efficiency comes at the cost of clarity.

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 and has both annotations and an output schema, which cover safety and return-value concerns. Still, the description leaves critical gaps around selector semantics and when to use hover, making it only minimally viable for an agent to invoke correctly.

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%, and the description does not explain the required 'selector' parameter—its format, whether it accepts CSS or XPath, or how to identify the element. The agent gets no semantics beyond the parameter name.

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 clear verb ('Hover') and target ('an element'), making the action understandable and distinguishable from sibling tools like click or type_text. However, it does not differentiate itself further or clarify whether this is a browser-specific hover action.

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 hover versus alternatives such as click or scroll, and no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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