input_mouseDrag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the coordinate system (relative to MOHO window) but does not mention simulation details such as step interpolation, button behavior, or the need for window focus. The description is adequate but lacks deeper behavioral context.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and provides only relevant information. Every sentence earns its place with no unnecessary words.

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 and full schema coverage, the description covers purpose and typical use cases. It lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites or side effects, but for a drag operation this is somewhat self-evident. No output schema means no return value explanation is needed.

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?

The schema already provides 100% parameter coverage, including descriptions for startX/startY/endX/endY and enums for button. The description adds minimal semantic value beyond what the schema states, merely restating the coordinate variables. Thus 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 clearly states the action ('Drag from (startX, startY) to (endX, endY)') and specifies it is relative to the MOHO window. It distinguishes itself from sibling input_mouseClick by focusing on drag operations, and lists specific 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 concrete use cases ('dragging timeline playhead, sliders, or drawing operations'), giving clear context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like input_mouseClick, but the drag-specific language implicitly differentiates it.

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