mouse_move

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and does well: it discloses non-clicking behavior, hover-state purpose, and a concrete failure mode with the allowlist precondition. It doesn't describe return values or coordinate validation behavior, but the critical behavioral trait (precondition gating) is covered.

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?

Three tight sentences: action, use case, and precondition. Front-loaded with the verb, no wasted words, and the operational constraint is clearly separated.

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 one-parameter motion tool with no output schema, the description covers action, purpose, and the critical allowlist precondition that would otherwise cause silent failure. It's complete enough to use correctly, though it could mention whether error is returned vs no-op more precisely (it does both: 'returns an error and does nothing').

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 100%, so the single coordinate parameter is fully documented in the schema with pixel-position and scaling details. The description adds nothing parameter-specific, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb (Move) and resource (mouse cursor), and immediately clarifies scope with 'without clicking,' which cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like left_click, double_click, and left_click_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?

Explains the use case ('triggering hover states') and a key precondition (frontmost app must be in session allowlist). It doesn't name a specific alternative for hover-like positioning, but the context is clear enough to route correctly.

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