browser_drop

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint:true and readOnlyHint:false. The description adds the 'as if dragged from outside the page' mechanism and the required condition for paths/data, but does not disclose side effects, permission requirements, or what triggers, beyond what annotations imply.

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 concise sentences, action front-loaded, no filler. The first sentence states the tool's purpose, and the second sentence provides a crucial constraint, making every word useful.

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?

For a moderate-complexity mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the core action, input constraint, and drop origin. It does not elaborate on element compatibility or return values, but the schema already details parameter formats.

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%, but the description adds the essential 'At least one of paths or data must be provided' constraint, which is not in the schema. It also clarifies that 'data' is a MIME-typed map, reinforcing the schema's examples.

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 uses a specific verb 'Drop' and clearly identifies the resource: 'files or MIME-typed data onto an element'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like browser_drag by explicitly noting 'as if dragged from outside the page', which frames the unique behavior.

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 gives context (simulating an external drag) but does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives like browser_file_upload or browser_drag. The 'At least one of paths or data must be provided' is a parameter rule, not an usage guideline comparing to siblings.

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