Drag and drop

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention key details like whether the action waits for drop completion, how the mouse moves, or if events (e.g., dragstart, drop) are fired. The description is too minimal to inform an agent of the tool's runtime behavior.

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 conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. While it could be more informative, it is not verbose and respects the principle of front-loading. It earns its place.

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 5 required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or the sequence of actions (e.g., mouse down, move, up). For a complex action like drag-and-drop, more context is needed for an agent to use it effectively.

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 descriptions already cover all 5 parameters with clear explanations (e.g., sourceRef is 'Element ref from the latest browser_snapshot'). The description adds no new semantic meaning, but since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate. No contradictions or omissions.

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 one element onto another') and specifies the resource ('both by ref from browser_snapshot'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like click, hover, and type by explicitly naming drag-and-drop. This is a specific verb-resource pair with no ambiguity.

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 (e.g., browser_click for clicking or browser_hover for hovering). It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or common pitfalls. The only context is implicit: use it for dragging elements.

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