browser_click_at

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

Description only mentions coordinate-based clicking with viewport relativity. No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral aspects but omits details like event simulation, scrolling, or out-of-bounds handling. Adequate for a simple action but minimal.

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?

Single sentence, 14 words, front-loaded with key information. Could include brief parameter notes without losing 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?

With 5 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It provides usage context but fails to document parameters or return behavior, leaving significant gaps for the agent.

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%, yet the description does not explain any parameters beyond hinting at x and y. It misses button, clickCount, and tabId, leaving the agent to infer their meanings from the schema alone.

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?

Clearly states it clicks at exact CSS pixel coordinates relative to the viewport. Differentiates from sibling tools like browser_click by specifying it's for use when no good selector exists.

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?

Explicitly says 'Useful with screenshots when no good selector exists', guiding the agent to use this tool over selector-based alternatives.

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