Skip to main content
Glama

zerodom_click_node

Click a page element and receive a diff of what changed—appeared, gone, or updated—avoiding full page re-listing. Navigations return the full graph instead.

Instructions

Click a node and return what changed on the page.

Returns a diff — + appeared, - gone, ~ value changed — because most clicks alter a handful of nodes and re-listing the page would cost hundreds. A navigation renumbers everything, so that returns the full graph instead.

A same-page click reporting "no structural change" shortly after navigation is ambiguous — could be a real no-op, could be a server- rendered control (Next.js/Remix/Nuxt) whose framework hasn't finished attaching its handler yet. Flagged, not retried automatically: a false retry risks a real double-submit on a control that did fire. Suppressed when the click triggered a network request even without a DOM change yet — an in-flight fetch/GraphQL mutation (auth actions routinely take 800ms-2s to resolve) is itself evidence the handler did fire, just hasn't finished.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
node_idYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.0.6

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and succeeds: it discloses diff notation, full-graph return on navigation, ambiguity of same-page no-ops, the no-retry policy, and the network-request suppression case. This is exactly the kind of side-effect and edge-case transparency an agent needs.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence states the core contract; every subsequent sentence earns its place by explaining diff behavior, navigation, retry risk, and network suppression. Despite length, it is tightly structured and front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter interaction tool with no annotations and an output schema, the description covers all tricky scenarios: same-page no-op ambiguity, double-submit risk, navigation renumbering, and slow async auth actions. Nothing essential to predicting behavior is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has one parameter, node_id, with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must explain it. It only says 'a node' and never clarifies where node_id comes from or how it relates to zerodom_find/read_page output, leaving the agent to infer the identifier's origin.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Opens with a specific verb and object: 'Click a node and return what changed on the page.' It distinguishes itself by promising a diff rather than a full page listing, separating it from read_page and other interaction siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The usage is implied: call this to click a node and see what changed. It gives rich behavioral context about diff returns, navigation, and retries, but never explicitly says when to prefer it over siblings like hover, fill_node, or press_key, and provides no when-not-to-use exclusions.

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