hover

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

There are no annotations, so the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Hover over an element' with no mention of what happens on hover, whether it waits for visibility, error handling, side effects, or return value. This is a significant omission for a browser automation action.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, but it is under-specified for the tool's behavior. It is not appropriately sized given the need for usage and behavioral context. The single sentence is efficient but sacrifices substance.

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 a simple hover action and full schema coverage, the description is still incomplete. It does not explain the timeout behavior, what happens when the selector is not found, or what the tool returns. The absence of output schema and behavioral context leaves significant gaps for an agent to use it correctly.

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% since both 'timeout' and 'selector' have descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter context. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already documents the parameters adequately.

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 'Hover over an element' clearly states the action ('hover') and the resource ('an element'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'click' or 'type'. However, it is extremely brief and does not specify the context or expected effect, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, scenarios, or contrast with similar actions. Without such context, the agent is left to infer usage from the tool name and schema.

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