hover

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions mouse movement and optional modifier keys, but does not explain what happens with out-of-bounds coordinates, whether the pointer actually moves smoothly over intermediate points, or if it just teleports. The behavior is partially disclosed but with gaps.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded and to the point. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or fluff. It earns its place perfectly.

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 tool has 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is somewhat under-informative. It covers the high-level purpose but does not explain return values (e.g., success indicator, new coordinates), required parameters, or error conditions. The tool is relatively simple, so the description is adequate but not fully complete.

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 only 38%, with most parameters having no description. The tool description does add meaning by explaining the overall action, but it does not add details for individual parameters beyond what the schema already has (e.g., durationMs, endElementId, startElementId have some description in schema). The high-level description partially compensates but leaves many parameters undocumented.

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 clearly states the tool moves the mouse pointer from one position to another, optionally with modifier keys. It distinguishes its purpose by mentioning hover effects and drag-without-click, which helps differentiate it from sibling tools like click_element or click_and_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 description gives some context about when to use it (for hover effects and drag-without-click), but does not explicitly say when not to use it or mention alternatives like click_and_drag or perform_actions. It provides basic guidance but lacks exclusions.

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