ui.long_click

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing: no press duration, no expected side effects, no permission or timing requirements, and no indication of what a successful press does. '节点级长按' is a restatement of the name.

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 text is short but by under-specification, not by efficient compression. A four-character phrase cannot be considered front-loaded structure when essential invocation context is absent.

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 two-parameter interaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves everything the agent needs (selector syntax, pkg usage, press semantics) unspecified. It is inadequate for correct 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and neither parameter is documented. The phrase 'node-level' loosely implies that selector targets a UI node, but the format of selector and the role of pkg are entirely unexplained in both schema and description.

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 '节点级长按' (node-level long press) states a specific verb (long press) and scope (node-level), which separates it from coordinate-based siblings like input.tap. However, it gives no differentiation from ui.click or ui.hold_read and relies on the agent knowing what 'node-level' means in this framework.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus ui.click, ui.hold_read, or input.tap/input.swipe. The agent must infer that a long press is needed and that this variant targets a node rather than coordinates.

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