drag

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 doesn't say whether this is a single atomic action, whether it waits for the drop, whether it dispatches HTML5 drag events or pointer events, or what it returns. For an interaction tool with zero annotation coverage, that's a meaningful gap.

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?

A single short sentence that is front-loaded and wastes no words. It is not under-specified for a tool with this name and a fully documented schema.

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 browser automation gesture tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits crucial operational context: how the drag is performed, whether it works with HTML5 draggable elements, timing, and return values. The agent has enough to attempt a call but not enough to do so reliably.

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 100%, and the schema already documents both parameters as CSS selectors for source and target. The description adds no syntax, format, or matching-semantics details beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and action ('Drag and drop') plus the two endpoints involved, which is clear. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like mouseDown/mouseUp or click, so an agent must infer that this is a composite gesture, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as mouseDown+mouseMove+mouseUp for multi-step drags. The agent gets no help choosing between this and the low-level mouse tools.

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