pointer

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 discloses the global coordinate system, action-specific parameters, and behavior like 'hold button' for drag and 'content down' for scroll. It does not cover edge cases like out-of-bounds coordinates, but the core behavior is well described.

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 that packs a lot of information using vertical-bar separators and parentheses. It is efficient and front-loaded, though a more structured format could improve readability.

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 (9 parameters, 1 required) and lack of schema descriptions, the description covers the main actions and their essential parameters. It omits scroll_dx and does not describe return values, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need for that. Overall, it is mostly complete for selecting and using the tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains the meaning of x, y, to_x, to_y, button, double, scroll_dy for the respective actions. The scroll_dx parameter is not mentioned, but it has a default of 0 and is less critical. The description adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 controls the mouse in global coordinates and lists four specific actions (move, click, drag, scroll) with detailed syntax. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like keyboard or launch which handle other input methods.

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 provides explicit syntax for each action, implying when to use each variant. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or mention alternatives, though sibling tools are clearly different in purpose.

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