Drag Pointer Between Coordinates

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

The description adds valuable behavioral guarantees beyond annotations: 'Always releases the button' and 'failure-safe' disclose important safety behavior not found in the readOnly/destructive hints. However, it does not detail what 'failure-safe' entails or the exact side effects of the drag (though destructiveHint is true).

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every phrase earns its place (failure-safe, waypoints, movement profiles, button release). No redundancy or filler.

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?

The description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly given the rich schema and output schema. It covers the primary behavior, optional waypoints, movement profiles, and the button-release guarantee. It does not explain failure-safe semantics, but the schema and context cover most operational details.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the meaning of waypoints and profile but does not add substantial new semantic detail beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the action ('Perform one failure-safe viewport drag'), the scope (through optional ordered waypoints), and the method (direct or bounded natural movement while the button remains pressed). It distinguishes this from coordinate-based moves and element-based drags by emphasizing waypoints and the button-pressed state.

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 description conveys when to use this tool: for viewport coordinate drags with waypoints and movement profiles. It implies it is for coordinate-based interactions rather than element-based ones (e.g., page_pointer_drag_element), but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it.

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