hover_with_action

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly states what each action does and what the return is. It doesn't address side-effect caveats such as page navigation or visibility requirements, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 front-loaded with the summary and well organized into Args, Returns, Tool selection, and Notes. It is slightly repetitive because Notes restates selector roles already covered in Args, but the structure is scannable and easy to follow.

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?

It covers all parameters, all three action branches, selection guidance, and return behavior, so an agent can call it correctly in most cases. Minor gaps are the lack of stated preconditions such as an active browser session and no explicit exclusion for simple clicks, but these are not blocking.

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?

The schema has zero parameter descriptions, but the description compensates fully by explaining selector1's role per action, selector2's requirement and nullability per action, and the exact meaning of every action enum value. This is thorough and directly actionable.

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 opens with the exact operations: hover, optional click, and drag-and-drop, and explicitly names hover-triggered menus as a key use case. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like click, focus_on, and scroll.

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?

It provides a dedicated 'Tool selection' section that maps each action value to a scenario, and says to use the tool for hover interactions, hover-triggered menus, and drag-and-drop. It does not explicitly mention when to use sibling tools instead, but the intended usage is clear enough.

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