pikvm_mouse_move

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

No annotations are provided. The description adds behavioral details: absolute moves use screen pixels, relative moves clamp deltas to -127 to 127. However, it does not disclose potential side effects or limitations (e.g., out-of-bounds coordinates) beyond what the schema provides.

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: first states the primary action, second clarifies coordinate semantics. No redundant words.

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?

With no output schema, the description focuses on input behavior. It adequately covers the move operation but could mention return values or prerequisites (e.g., calibration). Given sibling richness, it is reasonably complete.

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 100%, and the description adds value by explaining that relative moves clamp deltas to -127 to 127, which is not in the schema descriptions. This extra context helps the agent select appropriate values.

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 verb 'move' and resource 'mouse cursor to a position on the remote machine.' It specifies absolute vs relative moves with coordinate system details, distinguishing it from sibling tools like pikvm_mouse_click and pikvm_mouse_scroll.

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 absolute and relative move modes but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like pikvm_mouse_click or pikvm_mouse_scroll. Usage context is implied but not guided.

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