browser_move

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose two useful traits: revealed content is unnumbered until a fresh snapshot, and the reply reports the final pointer position. It leaves out edge behavior such as off-screen elements or whether hover auto-scrolls.

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 short sentences, verb-first, each carrying distinct information: what it does, the ordering constraint, and the return value. Nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 lightweight pointer action with no output schema, the description covers purpose, ordering, and response shape adequately, and the schema handles parameter edge cases like stale emsns. Minor gaps remain around failure modes beyond the stale-element case.

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 emsn, x/y, tabId, windowId and the snapshot staleness rule are already documented in structured fields. The description adds only the workflow framing around snapshotId, not new parameter meaning; baseline 3 applies.

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?

Opens with a concrete verb and target: 'Hover the pointer over an element.' The stated scenario (menus/tooltips that only appear under the pointer) implicitly separates it from browser_click, but no sibling is named explicitly, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 a clear when-to-use condition ('for a menu or a tooltip that only appears under it') and a sequencing rule ('hover first, then snapshot, then act'). It stops short of naming alternatives such as browser_click or stating when not to hover.

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