iphone_tap

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it discloses nothing: no coordinate system (pixels vs points), no device/emulator targeting, no sync or wait behavior, no error modes for out-of-bounds taps. The parenthetical '(点)' is too ambiguous to count as a unit disclosure.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but the brevity is under-specification rather than economy; a single fragment cannot carry a tool's critical call semantics.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description is the only source of behavioral detail for a mutation action on a device — and it provides essentially none.

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%, so the description must compensate, and it only weakly does so by implying x/y are screen coordinates. It adds no origin convention, no range, and no units, leaving both required parameters effectively undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: tapping a screen coordinate. An agent can tell it is a coordinate-based tap rather than an element-based one, but the description never names the closely related sibling iphone_tap_element, so the differentiation is only implicit in the word 坐标.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus iphone_tap_element, iphone_long_press, or iphone_swipe, and no preconditions such as the target app needing to be foregrounded. The agent must infer everything from the name.

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