browser_visual_cursor

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses default behavior: the overlay is enabled by default and is silent while the tab is hidden or Chrome is in the background. However, it does not state whether the setting persists across tabs or sessions, whether toggling causes any side effects, or what happens to the overlay during screenshots or automation.

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, front-loaded with the action and followed by the default behavior. There is no filler or repetition.

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 simple two-boolean toggle with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the basic purpose and defaults. It omits persistence, side effects, and when to use the tool versus leaving the overlay in its default state, leaving meaningful gaps for an agent deciding whether to invoke it.

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%, so the description must compensate for both boolean parameters. It hints at defaults for "enabled" and "backgroundSilent" (silent while hidden/background), but never explicitly explains what passing false to either parameter does. An agent still has to infer the exact semantics of both booleans.

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 specific verb and resource: "Toggle the on-page cursor overlay." This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_screenshot, browser_click, or browser_scroll. It stops short of naming alternatives or contrasting with related visual tools, so a 5 is not warranted.

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 explains defaults (enabled, silent in hidden/background tabs) but does not say when an agent should toggle the cursor versus leaving it alone. There is no guidance on when to disable it, when to enable background visibility, or how this interacts with sibling browser tools.

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