mouse_move

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behavior about coordinate system and origin, but omits other behavioral traits such as clamping behavior, animation duration, and the require_fresh_screenshot parameter. These are present in the schema but not described, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and every sentence adds value. The coordinate guidance is concise and directly relevant. No fluff or redundancy.

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 tool with 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It covers the coordinate system well but omits details about optional parameters and when to use alternatives. The context is sufficient for basic movement but not for advanced behaviors like clamping or fresh screenshot requirements.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the meaning of x and y as logical points and provides computation guidance. However, it does not explain clamp, duration_ms, or require_fresh_screenshot, leaving these parameters semantically incomplete.

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 'Move the mouse cursor' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like mouse_click, mouse_drag, and mouse_scroll by focusing on pure movement. The additional coordinate computation guidance further clarifies its scope.

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 clear context on how to use coordinates (logical points, origin top-left, compute from screenshot metadata), but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like mouse_click or mouse_drag. It implies usage for moving without clicking or dragging, but lacks explicit exclusions.

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