hover

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the hover action and its UI effect, but omits operational details such as whether it scrolls the element into view, waits for the menu to appear, or what happens on failure.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The action and effect are stated immediately, and every word earns its place.

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 interaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core action and effect. However, it lacks enough behavioral context about waiting, ref sourcing, and failure behavior to be fully complete.

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 50%: snapshot is documented in the schema, while ref has no schema description. The phrase 'by ref' partially compensates by indicating that ref is an element reference, but adds little syntax or validation detail.

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 the mouse over'), the target ('an element by ref'), and the outcome ('opens hover menus, tooltips'). This distinguishes it from sibling click/type/select tools without needing the schema.

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 effect implies the use case—triggering hover menus or tooltips—but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus alternatives like click, nor any exclusions. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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