swipe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals touch semantics ('finger lands/lifts'), and explains the effect of duration ('Longer is slower and more likely to be read as a drag rather than a fling'). While it doesn't cover every side effect, the examples and duration behavior provide solid transparency above the baseline.

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 concise and front-loaded: one-sentence summary, then usage guidance, then a brief args list. Every section adds value, and the repeated arg descriptions are short and not excessive. Well-structured for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 params, output schema present), the description covers the core context: what it does, when to use it, and behavior nuances. It omits coordinate origin details, but that is likely standard environment knowledge. Overall, an agent can call this tool correctly without further documentation.

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%, and the description largely repeats the schema's parameter descriptions. It adds minimal new meaning beyond the schema, such as the phrasing 'finger lands' vs 'drag ends', but no substantive new information. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema already fully documents parameters.

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 tool performs a 'drag between two points' and provides specific use cases (dismiss card, pull to refresh, pattern lock, slider). It explicitly differentiates from the sibling `scroll` tool, leaving no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 when to use this vs. alternatives: 'Use `scroll` for ordinary page movement. Reach for this to dismiss a card, pull to refresh, draw a pattern lock, or drag a slider.' This gives clear when-to-use guidance and a direct exclusion for ordinary scrolling.

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