ios_drag

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive mutation. The description adds that it performs a drag gesture and results in moving or reordering UI elements, which is useful context beyond the raw annotations. It does not go deeper into side effects, prerequisites, or failure behavior, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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?

A single sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core behavior and immediately follows with the practical purpose, making every word earn 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 rich input schema (all parameters documented), the presence of an output schema, and annotations covering safety and mutation profile, the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke this tool correctly. It provides the essential semantic framing without needing to restate schema details.

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 has 100% parameter description coverage, so the schema already explains from_ref, to_ref, idem_key, and duration_s. The description's 'one element onto another' mirrors the from_ref/to_ref relationship but adds no extra semantics for the optional parameters. Baseline 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 states a specific verb ('Drag') and resource ('one element onto another'), plus the intended use cases ('reordering lists and moving items'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling gesture tools like ios_swipe and ios_tap, which do not involve a source and destination element pair.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use the tool: reordering lists or moving an item to a target location. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it lacks full exclusion guidance, but the element-to-element semantics make the use case clear.

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