mouse_move

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

With no annotations, the description is the primary source of behavioral information. It states the action but does not disclose side effects, OS event generation, screen boundaries, or whether the movement is instantaneous. The parenthetical 'pixel-accurate' is minimal added value beyond the action itself.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the action and adding the qualifier 'pixel-accurate' immediately. Its brevity is a strength here, as the tool is simple.

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 two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is adequate but thin. It lacks sibling tool differentiation, coordinate origin, and cross-monitor behavior details, which an agent might need to avoid misusing it in a multi-display setup.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the otherwise opaque x and y parameters. It defines them as 'absolute coordinates' using pixels, but does not clarify the coordinate origin or monitor scope, leaving a meaningful but incomplete explanation.

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 explicitly states the verb 'move' and resource 'cursor' with the qualifier 'to absolute coordinates (pixel-accurate)', making the core action clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like mouse_drag or mouse_click, but the phrase 'absolute coordinates' implies a standalone pointer repositioning operation.

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 versus alternatives such as mouse_drag, and it does not mention when to avoid it. The usage context is implicit—'when you need to move the cursor'—but no alternatives or conditions are given.

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