Browser Drag & Drop

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden and does well by spelling out the event sequence (mousedown on source → mousemove to target → mouseup on target) and noting that drag events are dispatched. That tells an agent this is a real synthesized gesture rather than a synthetic property set. It does not say what happens on failure (e.g., source/target not found, element not draggable) or whether a session must already be attached.

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?

Two tight sentences with the action front-loaded, followed by use cases and the mechanism. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description must stand alone; it covers what the tool does, when to use it, and how the gesture is simulated. Missing pieces are failure/return behavior and any session prerequisite, which are minor but not fully covered.

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 100%, so all four parameters (including mode, sessionId, and both selectors) are already documented in the schema. The description adds useful conceptual framing of source vs target but no syntax, format, or default details beyond the schema; 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 and resource ('Drag an element and drop it onto another element') and names concrete scenarios (kanban boards, sortable lists, reordering). An agent can immediately distinguish this from browser_click, browser_hover, or browser_select_option without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear positive usage context ('Use for kanban boards, sortable lists, reordering items, or any drag-and-drop interface'), which is more than most siblings offer. However, it gives no exclusions or alternatives — nothing says when to prefer browser_click or browser_hover over a drag sequence.

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