setPointerTrack

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation by stating exactly what is destroyed ('replaces the pointer recorded with the take'), the state dependency (checkpoint requirement, only for this server's takes), the side effect (plans zooms on new clicks clear of existing ones), and the return signal (autoZoomsAdded).

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?

Dense but front-loaded: the scenario that selects the tool comes first, then behavior/undo, then the coordinate math. Every clause carries actionable information, including the formula an agent needs to build valid events.

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 nuanced edit operation with no output schema, it covers what is destroyed, the checkpoint/undo model, the zoom-planning side effect, and the return field. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 the description fully compensates: it defines `at` (epoch ms from Date.now(), same clock as recordingStartedAt), `x`/`y` as fractions 0–1 of the recorded window, and even supplies the border/outerWidth/outerHeight formula to convert client coordinates.

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+resource ('setPointerTrack' → 'Give the pointer's path here and OpenScreen draws it') and defines the exact scope: script-driven takes where the real pointer never moved. An agent can tell this apart from getCursorTrack (reads the track) and addZoom/addAutoZooms (which this tool plans zooms as stopRecording does), even without the sibling named verbatim.

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?

Explicit when-to-use ('For a take driven by a script rather than the real mouse'), when-not ('Only for a take recorded by this server'), and the alternative/undo path ('restoreCheckpoint undoes it'). It also names the precondition (needs a checkpoint on a project not open in the editor).

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