click_element_by_xpath

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'with confirmation' which hints at some interactive or safety behavior, but doesn't clarify what this means (e.g., user prompt, automatic check, error handling). It fails to address critical aspects like error conditions (e.g., invalid XPath, element not found), performance implications, or browser session requirements beyond the session_id parameter.

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, focused sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. While it could be more informative, it wastes no words and is appropriately sized for a basic action tool. The structure is front-loaded with the core functionality.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (browser interaction with XPath), no annotations, and an output schema (which handles return values), the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It covers the basic action but lacks crucial context about behavior, parameters, and differentiation from siblings, leaving gaps that could hinder effective use despite the output schema.

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 but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'session_id' represents (browser instance, user session) or provide guidance on XPath syntax/format. The mention of 'confirmation' might relate to parameters but isn't linked to any specific input, leaving parameters essentially 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Click') and target ('an interactive element by XPath'), specifying the method of element identification. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'click_element' tool, which likely uses a different selector method, leaving some ambiguity about when to choose this specific XPath-based version.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'click_element' or other interaction tools. It mentions 'with confirmation' but doesn't explain what this confirmation entails or when it's required, offering minimal context for decision-making.

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