mouse_move

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

No annotations are present, so the description fully carries the burden. It discloses the coordinate origin (top-left), movement modes, and the return value (position and display size). However, it omits behavior when no parameters are passed or whether absolute and relative can combine.

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 compact and front-loaded with the main action ('Move the cursor'), containing no filler. Each clause delivers distinct information: movement modes, coordinate origin, and return value.

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 tool with 4 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers core semantics (absolute vs. relative, return value) and coordinate origin. It lacks edge cases like multi-display behavior or no-parameter invocation, but is otherwise complete enough for basic use.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must explain parameters. It does clarify that x/y are absolute global points and dx/dy are relative, adding meaning beyond the schema. Still, it leaves out units, precedence, and optionality details.

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 'Move the cursor' with a specific verb and resource, and clearly distinguishes absolute (x, y) from relative (dx, dy) movement. This uniquely identifies it among sibling mouse tools like click or mouse_drag.

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 tool's purpose implies when to use it (when cursor movement is needed), but there is no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or comparison to alternatives like mouse_drag. The absolute/relative distinction hints at parameter choice, but no direct exclusions are provided.

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