tv_move

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 usefully discloses that movement is relative (dx/dy are deltas), but says nothing about the capture modes' effects, whether movement is animated/instant, or permission/error behavior for a mutation-like pointer action.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action followed by the safety hint. No wasted words, though the extreme brevity is partly under-specification rather than 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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but with no annotations and 0% parameter coverage the description leaves the capture parameter and the tool's behavioral profile unaddressed. For a 3-parameter pointer tool it is thinner than needed.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. 'Relative pointer' correctly frames dx/dy as deltas, but the capture enum (auto/never/always) is entirely unexplained in both schema and description, leaving one of three parameters opaque.

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 ('Move relative pointer') and the 'relative' qualifier distinguishes it from an absolute-position move. It never names or contrasts with siblings like tv_click or tv_scroll, so an agent must infer the boundary itself.

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?

'Inspect unknown target before clicking' implies the tool is a precursor to a click on unverified targets, giving implied usage. It does not state when to prefer tv_move over tv_scroll or tv_ui_anchor, nor any exclusion conditions.

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