drag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It helpfully decomposes the gesture into press, move, and release, which is genuine behavioral detail beyond the name 'drag'. But it omits the button parameter, coordinate space, timing/interpolation, and whether a session must already exist.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, and the operation order is clear. It is arguably too terse for a five-parameter tool, but structurally efficient.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but with 0% schema coverage and no annotations the description leaves the button parameter, coordinate system, and session prerequisites undocumented. It is incomplete for a five-parameter input tool.

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 0% and only titles (X1, X2, Y1, Y2, Button) exist. The description maps x1/y1 to the press point and x2/y2 to the release point, adding some meaning, but it never mentions the button parameter at all despite right/middle options existing.

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?

States a specific operation with named coordinates: press at (x1, y1), move to (x2, y2), release. An agent can tell this is a drag gesture, distinct from click or move_mouse by the press-move-release sequence. However, it does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from siblings like click or move_mouse.

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives (e.g., use click instead for a simple press), and no prerequisites or context such as needing an active session. The agent must infer all of this.

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