firefox_drag

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the basic drag action, omitting details like mouse event simulation, timing, or whether it works in cross-origin frames. Lacks the behavioral context needed for correct invocation.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise but at the expense of necessary detail. It could be front-loaded with more context without becoming overly lengthy.

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 high parameter count (10) and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, prerequisites (e.g., tab must be open and interactive), or behavior on failure. A more complete description would include these aspects.

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 coverage is 40%, but the description adds no parameter clarification. Many parameters (fromX, fromY, toX, toY, steps) lack explanations in both schema and description. The existing schema descriptions are brief and contain typos ('fire-fodex'), reducing clarity.

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 from one point or element to another' clearly specifies the action (drag) and the source and target (point or element). It distinguishes from sibling tools like click, move, etc., which involve different interactions.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as for complex drag-and-drop operations requiring multiple steps or when a simpler click suffices. No exclusions or alternative tool references.

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