mouse_move

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that humanize=True uses a Bezier path, implying instant movement otherwise, but does not specify coordinate system, out-of-bounds behavior, or whether events are triggered. Basic but incomplete.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Every word earns its place; no redundancy. Ideal conciseness.

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 simple mouse movement tool, the description covers the basics but omits key details like coordinate system, instant vs. animated movement (beyond humanize), and any side effects. With no output schema visible, completeness is moderate but adequate for simple cases.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by labeling x and y as 'raw coordinates' and explaining humanize's effect (Bezier path). While it does not detail ranges or units, it provides essential context for all three parameters.

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 ('Move cursor') and the target ('raw coordinates'), with a specific option ('humanize=True uses Bezier path'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like mouse_click_xy by focusing solely on movement, but could be more explicit about coordinate system or behavior.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like mouse_drift, hover, or mouse_click_xy. There is no mention of context or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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