browser_hover

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It doesn't mention side effects like whether the hover implies a click, how it interacts with the page state, or whether it waits for menus to appear. The description is minimal and doesn't disclose any potential side effects.

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 conveys the core action. It is front-loaded with the action and target. It could be longer, but the brevity is acceptable given the simplicity, though it misses opportunity to add value.

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 three parameters with no descriptions, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain how the element is identified, whether it returns any confirmation, or what errors might occur. The tool's purpose is simple, but the lack of parameter guidance makes it incomplete.

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%, and the description does not elaborate on any of the three parameters (ref, text, selector). It doesn't explain how to specify the element, or whether all are needed. The schema itself has no property descriptions, leaving the agent entirely in the dark about parameter semantics.

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 states the verb 'hover' and resource 'element', and the purpose of triggering hover menus, which is somewhat specific. However, it doesn't distinguish it from sibling tools like browser_click or browser_observe, and the phrase 'hover menus' could be ambiguous.

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?

It gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus others. The fact that it triggers hover menus implies a use case, but the description doesn't state when hover is needed or when clicking might be more appropriate.

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