hover

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, and it discloses almost nothing. It does not state that hovering can trigger side effects (tooltips, dropdowns, CSS state changes), whether it is idempotent, or whether the page state is affected — all relevant for an automation tool.

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, front-loaded with the action. It wastes no words, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than tight editing.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and a required uid parameter that is undocumented in both schema and description, the definition is too thin for a tool that mutates UI state. An agent lacks enough information to invoke it confidently.

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 only 67%: uid has no description in the schema, and the tool description does not compensate by explaining what 'the provided element' refers to. pageId and includeSnapshot are documented in the schema, but the description adds no meaning beyond it.

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 verb 'hover' is specific and maps to a recognizable browser interaction, but the resource is left vague as 'the provided element' — it never says the element is identified by the uid parameter or that this acts on a rendered page. An agent can guess the intent but gets no help distinguishing this from click/drag/fill siblings.

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?

There is no guidance on when to hover versus click, click_at, or evaluate_script, nor any mention of preconditions (e.g., element must exist, page must be loaded). The agent must infer all usage context from the name alone.

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