browser_hover

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Hover over element on page' and does not mention any side effects, state changes, whether a snapshot is required, or what happens after hovering. This is a significant transparency gap for a tool that can trigger UI changes via hover events.

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, short sentence that is front-loaded with the action. It is concise and has no unnecessary words. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices important behavioral context, but for pure conciseness it earns a high score.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must provide complete context. It only states the basic action and lacks information about prerequisites, effects, or edge cases. For a tool that interacts with a live page, this is insufficient for an agent to fully understand its impact.

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 both 'ref' and 'element' well-described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function as 'Hover over element on page', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_click and browser_type by the action 'hover'. However, it does not explicitly call out differences from siblings, so it misses the top score.

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 typical scenarios (e.g., triggering tooltips, dropdowns) or any exclusions. The usage is only implicitly conveyed by the action itself, which is not enough.

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