browser_click

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows this is a mutating action. The description adds no new behavioral context—it doesn't mention that clicking may navigate pages, submit forms, or trigger side effects, nor does it disclose the permission requirement implied by the 'element' parameter. Since annotations cover the main risk, this is neutral but not additive.

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 with no fluff or wasted words. It front-loads the core action without any extraneous content, and every word earns its place.

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, many sibling interaction tools, and no output schema, this description is severely incomplete. It gives no guidance on prerequisites (like needing a page snapshot for the target), permission behavior, or potential side effects of clicking. The one-line description leaves too much for the agent to infer, making it inadequate for correct tool selection and invocation.

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?

All parameters have schema descriptions, giving 100% coverage, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters—it doesn't clarify how target should be obtained or when to use modifiers. Baseline 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting and the description doesn't compensate beyond it.

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 a clear verb ('click') and resource ('web page'), but it is generic and does not distinguish this tool from sibling interaction tools like browser_hover or browser_drop. It implies clicking an element but doesn't mention that it targets specific elements from a snapshot, so it lacks the specificity needed to differentiate.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use browser_click versus alternatives like hover, press_key, or dragging. The description is a single sentence with no context about prerequisites, such as needing a snapshot to obtain a target reference, or when a click is the appropriate interaction.

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