ruyi_human_click

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It only mentions the trajectory algorithm but does not disclose click behavior details, potential side effects, failure conditions, or the effect of the algorithm choice. This is insufficient for a mutating action.

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 front-loaded sentence with no fluff, achieving efficiency. However, it is slightly too sparse to earn a 5.

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?

The tool has 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema. The description only covers the core purpose and algorithm, leaving parameter semantics and behavioral context incomplete. It is minimally viable but with clear gaps.

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 coverage is only 33%. The description adds some meaning to the algorithm parameter by explaining it generates natural trajectories, but target and pageIdx remain unexplained. It does not sufficiently compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 tool simulates a human mouse click and uses windmouse/bezier algorithms for natural trajectories. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ruyi_dom_click by emphasizing human-like behavior.

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 implies use when human-like click behavior is needed, but it does not explicitly compare with alternatives such as ruyi_dom_click or state when not to use it. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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