hover

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but doesn't explain what 'hover over' means behaviorally (e.g., triggers CSS :hover states, might reveal tooltips, doesn't click). It also omits potential side effects, error conditions, or response expectations.

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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple tool and front-loads the core action clearly.

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 browser interaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what happens after hovering (e.g., visual feedback, event triggers) or potential errors (e.g., if selector doesn't match). Given the complexity of browser automation, more context 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'selector' fully documented in the schema. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides about parameters, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 over') and target ('an element on the page'), providing a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'click' or 'select', which are also element interaction tools.

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 like 'click' or 'select'. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an element to be visible) or contextual constraints, leaving the agent with minimal usage direction.

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