drag

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=false already indicates a mutating operation, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the action. It does not disclose side effects, required conditions, or event behavior, so the description contributes minimal transparency.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundant words or filler. It is front-loaded and delivers the core message efficiently.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, full schema coverage, and the readOnlyHint annotation, the description is minimally sufficient. However, it lacks any mention of return values, error conditions, or usage context, making it less complete than it could be.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all parameters (from_uid, to_uid, includeSnapshot) are already well-described. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, meriting the baseline score.

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 (drag) and the target (an element onto another element), distinguishing it from sibling tools like click and hover. However, it is terse and does not elaborate on drag semantics or use cases.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention alternatives, exclusions, or specific scenarios where dragging is appropriate.

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