drag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing: whether the drag is instant or animated, whether it fires intermediate mouse events, whether offsets are applied relative to selectors or coordinates, or what happens on failure.

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?

It is brief, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than conciseness — a shortened label is not a useful front-loaded summary for an 8-parameter gesture tool.

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 an 8-parameter, zero-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the definition is completely inadequate; an agent has no basis for choosing between coordinate and selector inputs or for understanding the gesture semantics.

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?

Eight parameters with 0% schema description coverage and the description adds no meaning at all. The interaction between from_x/from_y, to_x/to_y, offset_x/offset_y, and the *_selector alternatives is entirely undocumented.

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 'Drag and drop' merely restates the tool name and gives no verb-plus-resource specificity beyond the obvious. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like mouse_down/mouse_up, move_mouse, or hover, which could plausibly be used for similar pointer manipulation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many pointer-related alternatives (mouse, mouse_down, mouse_up, move_mouse, hover). Nothing indicates prerequisites, that a source and target are needed, or that it is a composite gesture.

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