playwright__browser_hover

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint: true and openWorldHint: true, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the obvious. It does not disclose that hovering may trigger mouseover events, change UI state, or require the element to be visible. The description fails to enrich the understanding provided by annotations.

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 immediately conveys the core function. It is not verbose, but it is also not overly terse to the point of being useless. It earns its place by stating the purpose 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 simple hover tool, the description is too sparse. It lacks any context about return values, prerequisites (e.g., page loaded, element visible), side effects, or when to use hover over other interactions. Given the tool's 2 parameters and no output schema, the description should provide more guidance to compensate.

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% – both parameters (target and element) are already well-described in the schema. The tool description 'Hover over element on page' adds no additional meaning or usage hints for the parameters. 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 'Hover over element on page' clearly states the action (hover) and the target (element on a page). It distinguishes from sibling tools by naming a specific interaction, but it is brief and could be more precise about the nature of the hover (e.g., triggering mouse events).

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 vs. alternatives like playwright__browser_click, playwright__browser_drop, or playwright__browser_find. It does not mention prerequisites, constraints, or scenarios where hovering is appropriate. This is a significant gap given the large sibling set.

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