drag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It hints that motion is interpolated ('move smoothly'), which is a genuine trait, but omits button state semantics, coordinate system/origin, timing/duration, and what screenshot_after does. For a low-level input-synthesis tool this is a significant gap.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero filler that directly conveys the action sequence. It is well-sized for a terse gesture primitive, though its brevity overlaps with under-specification rather than pure economy.

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 6-parameter input tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves too much unsaid: coordinate origin, units, button default behavior, and the side effect of screenshot_after. An agent lacks enough context to invoke it confidently without reasoning from sibling conventions.

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 0% and there are 6 parameters. The phrase 'start'/'end' loosely maps to the start_x/start_y and end_x/end_y pairs, but the description never mentions the button enum or screenshot_after, nor explains coordinates are integer screen pixels. It only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 gives a specific verb sequence (press, move, release) that clearly defines a drag gesture on a resource (screen coordinates). An agent can tell it produces a drag rather than a click or a scroll, though it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling composite tools mouse_down/mouse_up/mouse_move.

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 drag versus composing mouse_down + mouse_move + mouse_up, nor versus click. No prerequisites, no context for choosing among the many pointer siblings. Usage must be fully inferred.

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