swipe

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it delivers almost nothing behavioral. It does not say whether the call blocks until the gesture settles (that lives only in the settle param), whether gestures are rejected out of bounds, or what a returned result looks like. Only the canned gesture geometry is communicated.

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?

Two short sentences, gesture purpose front-loaded, zero filler. Every clause carries usable information about how to produce the intended screen change.

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 9-parameter gesture tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers only geometry examples. Timing, settle behavior, failure conditions, and return semantics are absent, and with four extra timing params undocumented in the schema, the definition leaves real operational gaps.

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 56 percent and the four required coordinate params are described only by repeating their names ('x0', 'y0'...). The description does add real meaning by showing example values such as y=0.985 and 'left edge,' which signals the coordinates are normalized 0-1 fractions. It says nothing about ms, timeout, stable_for, or wait_change, leaving half the parameters undocumented in both sources.

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 (swipe) plus two concrete gesture recipes: 'up from y=0.985 to open or leave an app' and 'from the left edge for back.' That is enough for an agent to distinguish it from tap/hold/scroll, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling back and home_screen tools that serve the same outcomes.

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 gives concrete how-to recipes, which imply when to use this gesture (open/leave an app, navigate back), but there are no explicit exclusions or routing rules. With siblings named back and home_screen available, the agent gets no guidance on which of the three to prefer.

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