mouse_move

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden but only adds 'without clicking' and a motivation. It omits the coordinate space (screen vs. window), whether motion is instant or animated, and any side effects. The screenshot_after parameter's behavior is not disclosed at all.

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 tight sentence that front-loads the action and destination and folds the usage example into the end. Zero wasted words.

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 simple three-parameter pointer tool with no output schema, the definition is minimally adequate, but the unexplained coordinate space and the entirely undocumented screenshot_after flag leave an agent guessing at correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it only restates 'to (x, y)' with no units or coordinate-space meaning. The third parameter, screenshot_after, is never mentioned, leaving a third of the parameters undocumented in both schema and description.

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 ('Move') and resource ('the pointer') with the destination coordinates, and the phrase 'without clicking' cleanly distinguishes it from the click sibling. It is clear enough to select against most siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast with drag or mouse_down/mouse_up.

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 parenthetical '(e.g. to reveal hover menus)' implies a use case for hover-style interaction but is not an explicit when-to-use rule. No alternatives are named and there are no exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer the context.

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