Browser MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action but lacks behavioral details: e.g., whether it moves instantly or with animation, if it requires a page to be focused, what happens if coordinates are out of bounds, or if it triggers events. The reference to 'browser_docs' suggests incomplete disclosure.

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, direct sentence that states the purpose efficiently. However, the parenthetical reference to 'browser_docs' adds a dependency that may reduce clarity if not accessible. It's front-loaded but could be more self-contained.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal. It covers the basic action but lacks details on behavior, usage context, or expected outcomes. The reference to external docs suggests it's incomplete for standalone use, especially in a complex browser automation context.

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%, with clear parameter descriptions for 'x' and 'y' as coordinates. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, such as coordinate systems or units. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the action ('Move the mouse') and target ('to specific coordinates'), which is clear but basic. It doesn't distinguish from siblings like 'browser_mouse_click' or 'browser_hover', which are related mouse operations. The reference to 'browser_docs' suggests incomplete information in the description itself.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'browser_mouse_click' or 'browser_hover'. The description implies it moves the mouse without clicking, but doesn't specify use cases or prerequisites. The reference to external docs ('see browser_docs') hints at missing context.

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