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. It describes the mechanical gesture but says nothing about side effects, whether the drag can mutate the page, or how the required allow_writes flag (default false) gates the operation. A drag that reorders a sortable list is a state-changing action and that is left undisclosed.

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 with the core gesture front-loaded before a short use-case list; there is no filler or repetition. It is appropriately sized for the gesture it describes.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is the only source of behavioral information, and it omits the allow_writes gating, coordinate conventions, and any error/failure behavior. It names the gesture but not enough of its semantics for confident 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% across 5 parameters, so the description must compensate. 'Press at one point... move to another' does implicitly map x/y to the start point and to_x/to_y to the destination, which is genuinely useful. But allow_writes is left unexplained in both the schema and the description, and no units or coordinate origin are given.

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 concrete verb-and-mechanism: 'Press at one point of the viewport, move to another and release', immediately telling the agent this is a pointer-drag gesture. It names concrete use cases (sliders, sortable lists, drag and drop). It stops short of explicitly distinguishing itself from siblings like click_at or press, so a 4 rather than a 5.

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 trailing examples ('sliders, sortable lists, drag and drop') imply the situations where drag is appropriate, giving implied usage. However, it never states when NOT to use it or routes the agent to alternatives such as click_at, scroll, or press for simpler pointer actions.

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