hover

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

Adds real context beyond the lone readOnlyHint=false annotation: it discloses that the mouse is moved "real"-ly (native input events, not synthetic dispatch) and that the call waits for and reports tooltip/flyout appearances. It stops short of saying what happens when no tooltip appears or whether hovering can trigger page handlers.

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 sentence, zero padding, with the mechanism front-loaded before the reported outcome. Nothing could be cut without losing meaning.

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?

Reasonable for a 9-param tool with no output schema: the description covers the mechanism and the kind of result returned. It is slightly thin on what a no-tooltip result looks like and on the default timeout, both of which an agent would want to know.

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?

All 9 parameters are fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the description needn't repeat them. It says nothing about the multiple element-targeting strategies (ref/text/selector/x,y) or the default wait, leaving the schema to carry that weight – baseline 3.

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 and mechanism ("Moves the real mouse over an element") plus the outcome ("reports tooltips/flyouts that appeared"), which separates it from click/type/scroll siblings without naming them. It's clear what it does, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with `click` or `query`.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for revealing hover-only UI like tooltips and flyouts. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no named alternative for cases where hovering fails.

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