drag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one meaningful behavioral trait beyond the schema: that drag uses a longer default duration than swipe. However, it says nothing about the serial parameter's effect (target device), how duration_ms interacts with the 'default', or whether the gesture can fail/miss, leaving real gaps for a no-annotation gesture tool.

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?

Two short sentences with the gesture and endpoints front-loaded, followed by the alias relationship. No filler, though the parenthetical '(slow swipe)' is redundant with 'drag'.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained. Still, for a 6-parameter gesture tool with zero annotation coverage and zero schema descriptions, the description leaves the serial and duration_ms parameters unexplained and gives no failure/fidelity context, which is only minimally adequate.

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 there are 6 parameters, so the description must compensate and largely does not. It covers only the four coordinate arguments implicitly and never mentions serial (device targeting) or duration_ms beyond the vague hint of a 'longer default'. Two of six parameters remain semantically undefined.

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?

States a specific verb (drag) plus the coordinate endpoints, and explicitly frames itself as an alias of swipe with a longer default, which lets an agent distinguish it from the sibling 'swipe' tool without opening either schema. The parenthetical '(slow swipe)' restates the gesture rather than adding new information, keeping it just short of a 5.

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 phrase 'Alias of swipe with a longer default' implicitly tells the agent to prefer drag over swipe when a slower gesture is desired, but it never states explicitly when to use drag versus swipe, nor any prerequisites (e.g., device selection via serial, coordinates relative to screen). Usage is inferable rather than spelled out.

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