Move the mouse cursor

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations: the movement follows a human-like curved path, coordinate spaces differ between browser and Windows, and out-of-range targets are clamped.

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 three tight sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and then adds the two important execution details: coordinate space and clamping behavior.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values. Given the two-parameter schema and the available annotations, the description provides sufficient context for correct invocation, though it could say a bit more about practical edge cases or timing.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema by explaining that browser coordinates are CSS viewport pixels and Windows coordinates are physical desktop pixels, plus the clamping behavior for out-of-range targets.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it says to move the active mouse cursor along a human-like curved path. It is clear what the tool does, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings such as mouse_drag or mouse_click.

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 the tool is for cursor movement, but gives no explicit guidance on when to use it versus mouse_drag, mouse_click, or mouse_position. There are no stated exclusions or alternative-routing instructions.

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