browser_mouse_drag_xy

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, indicating the tool performs a mutation. The description adds negligible behavioral context beyond the name, simply restating that it drags the left mouse button. It does not disclose that the action simulates a drag sequence (mousedown, mousemove, mouseup) or that it may trigger events or change page state.

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 sentence of six words, extremely concise and front-loaded. Every word carries meaning. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices some clarity (e.g., missing the start position).

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 the tool has 4 required parameters, a destructive annotation, and many sibling tools with similar functionality, the description is too sparse. It does not explain the drag behavior, coordinate system, or how it differs from 'browser_drag' or manual mouse actions. No output schema exists, so the description should provide more context about return values or side effects.

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 each parameter having a basic description (e.g., 'Start X coordinate'). The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. The description does not explain coordinate system (e.g., viewport vs page) or required units.

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 action ('Drag left mouse button') and the target ('to a given position'), which identifies the tool's purpose. However, it does not explicitly mention the start position, which is required by the schema, and does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'browser_drag' or 'browser_mouse_move_xy'.

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 such as 'browser_drag', 'browser_mouse_click_xy', or 'browser_mouse_down'+'browser_mouse_up'. No explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria are given.

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