mcp-electron-driver

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that hovering can skip actionability checks with 'force: true' when overlays intercept, which is useful behavioral context. However, it lacks details on error handling, what happens if the element isn't found, or performance implications.

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 front-loaded with the core action, followed by parameter guidance in two efficient sentences. Every word serves a purpose, with no wasted text, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool with 4 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but incomplete. It covers key parameter usage but lacks details on return values, error conditions, or integration with sibling tools, leaving gaps in contextual understanding.

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 75%, so the description adds value by explaining the purpose of 'selector' and 'ref' as alternatives, and clarifying 'force' for overlays. It doesn't cover 'timeoutMs', but compensates well for the partial schema coverage with practical usage insights.

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 ('hover the mouse over an element') and resource ('an element'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'click' or 'drag' beyond the hover action itself, which is why it doesn't reach a 5.

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 implies usage by mentioning 'when an overlay intercepts' for the force parameter, but it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'click' or 'wait_for_selector'. No exclusions or clear alternatives are stated.

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