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 description adds no new behavioral context. It does not explain that clicking may trigger navigation, change page state, or require an element reference from a snapshot. The description carries almost no informational weight beyond the annotations.

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 short sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately concise for a simple action, though it lacks structure or prioritization of key details like target specification. It is not verbose, so it scores well on conciseness.

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 destructive tool with five parameters and no output schema, the description is severely under-specified. It fails to mention how to specify the target element, the need for a snapshot reference, potential side effects of clicking, or what the tool returns. The agent has to rely entirely on the schema, which lacks operational context.

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 five parameters (button, target, element, modifiers, doubleClick) are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so it neither compensates nor detracts from 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?

The description states a clear verb and resource: 'Perform click on a web page'. It distinguishes the action as clicking but does not mention element targeting or differentiate from siblings like browser_hover or browser_drag. It is more specific than a pure tautology but lacks detail about what is being clicked.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not reference sibling tools like browser_hover or browser_type, nor does it mention any conditions or prerequisites. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and schema alone.

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