chrome-devtools-mcp-mux

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, suggesting this is a mutation tool, which aligns with 'drag' implying a state change. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond this—it doesn't specify what happens after dragging (e.g., reordering, dropping effects) or any side effects like UI updates. No contradiction with annotations, but it lacks detail on behavior like error handling or visual feedback.

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 that directly states the tool's action without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded and wastes no space, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 complexity of a drag operation in UI automation, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on expected outcomes, error conditions (e.g., if elements aren't draggable), and there's no output schema to clarify return values. With annotations only covering read-only status, more context on behavior and usage is needed for effective tool selection.

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 clear parameter descriptions in the schema (e.g., 'uid of the element to drag'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as explaining the relationship between 'from_uid' and 'to_uid' or the purpose of 'includeSnapshot'. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the burden.

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 'Drag an element onto another element' clearly states the action (drag) and target (element onto another element), but it's somewhat vague about the context (web UI automation) and doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'hover' or 'click' that also interact with elements. It's better than a tautology but lacks specificity about what 'drag' means in this system.

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 'hover', nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing elements to be draggable or in a specific state. It simply states what the tool does without context for selection.

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