appium_drag_and_drop

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

Annotations already flag mutation via readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds the full gesture sequence (long press, drag, release) plus default timings of 600ms and 1200ms. It does not cover failure modes or stale-element behavior, but the core interaction model is clearly disclosed.

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?

Three compact, front-loaded sentences cover the action, gesture mechanics, source/target options, and use cases with no filler or redundancy.

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 gesture tool with a 100%-covered schema, the description supplies the action sequence, timing defaults, coordinate/element alternatives, and practical use cases. The absence of an output schema leaves return behavior unspecified, but this is a minor gap for a UI gesture.

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?

The input schema documents all 9 parameters with constraints and defaults, so the coverage baseline of 3 applies. The description mostly restates the timing defaults and the element-vs-coordinate option already present in the schema, adding no significant new parameter-level meaning.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('drag-and-drop gesture from source to target') and gives distinctive mechanics. It is clearly distinct from generic siblings like appium_gesture and appium_perform_actions, though it does not explicitly name or contrast them.

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?

Provides concrete use cases ('reordering lists, moving items, drag-to-delete') that imply when to choose this tool over generic alternatives. It stops short of explicit when/when-not guidance or naming sibling alternatives, so routing is left partly to inference.

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