hover

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, signalling this is a state-affecting interaction, but the description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether hovering triggers tooltips/menus, whether it waits for a response, or what side effects occur. With only a single annotation, the description is expected to carry more of the behavioral burden and does not.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no wasted words and is front-loaded, but it is terse to the point of under-specification rather than economical, restating the tool name with almost no added information.

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 an element-interaction tool with no output schema, the description omits whether the call waits/blocks, what hover effects to expect, and how includeSnapshot affects the response. Given annotations cover only readOnlyHint, the description leaves key behavioral questions unanswered.

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 uid, pageId, and includeSnapshot are already documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline of 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb (hover) and its target (the element referenced by the uid param), so an agent knows the basic action. It does not differentiate this from siblings like click, drag, or fill, and 'the provided element' is mildly circular since the element is identified by the parameter.

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?

There is no statement of when to use hover versus click, fill, drag, or other element-interaction siblings, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage entirely from the tool name.

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