Left Click Drag

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

Annotations already communicate that this is destructive and not read-only, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the operation itself — it does not mention side effects, how targets are resolved, what gets modified, or how the drag is executed.

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?

The description is a single sentence with no filler, which is structurally efficient. However, it is so terse that it omits meaningful detail, and the phrase 'bound target' is unexplained, limiting the value of the brevity.

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 tool with five parameters, polymorphic target types, and a destructive annotation, this description is insufficient for an agent to reliably select and invoke it. It does not explain how to construct targets, how modifiers are specified, or whether state should be returned after the drag. These gaps are significant.

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 only 40%, so the description should compensate by explaining endpoint semantics. It only conveys that from_target and to are the two ends of a drag; it does not clarify element vs coordinate usage, modifiers, app_ref, or return_state. The nested schema does most of the explanatory work.

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 names the operation ('drag') and broadly distinguishes it from simple click and hover tools, but 'bound target' is undefined jargon and the description does not clarify that targets may be elements or coordinates. It conveys the general action, but not with the precision expected for a drag tool with polymorphic endpoints.

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 choose this tool over left_mouse_down/left_mouse_up, mouse_move, or left_click. The word 'drag' implies the use case, but no explicit when/when-not guidance or alternatives are provided.

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