ui_hover

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 discloses the visible effect of hovering (tooltips, menus), which is useful, but it omits whether the action is safe/non-destructive, how coordinates are interpreted, whether it returns revealed content, and what happens if no element is found.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It states the action immediately and appends the effect parenthetically.

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 six-parameter UI interaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It does not cover coordinate semantics, failure behavior, or what the agent should expect after settling, leaving significant gaps for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 67%, with ref, query, window, and settle_ms already described. The description adds a useful mapping by saying "element or point," corresponding to ref/query versus x/y, but it does not explain coordinate units or origin, and x/y remain undocumented in both schema and description.

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: "Move the mouse over an element or point." The parenthetical clarifies the effect (tooltips, hover menus), making it distinct from siblings like ui_click and ui_drag, though it doesn't explicitly name those alternatives.

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?

Usage is implied by the parenthetical "shows tooltips, hover menus," which indicates when hovering is useful. However, the description does not state when to prefer this over ui_click, ui_drag, or ui_invoke, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing a visible window.

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