click

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true) indicate mutation potential. The description adds important behavior: auto-scrolls the element into view and targets active tab by default. This provides context beyond annotations without contradiction.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then additional behavioral details. Every sentence adds value, and there is no wasted text.

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 description covers the core mechanism, auto-scroll, and tab targeting. With no output schema, return values are not required. Missing are error conditions or when clicks might fail, but the tool is simple enough that this is adequate.

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 100%, but the description adds value by clarifying the relationship between selector and ref as alternatives, stating default tab behavior, and noting button default (left). This helps an agent choose between parameters effectively.

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'), the target ('an element'), and provides two distinct identification methods (CSS selector or ref from snapshot). It distinguishes from siblings like double_click, right_click, etc., by specifying the click type and auto-scroll 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 explains when to use this tool (click with CSS selector or ref) and mentions auto-scrolling to fix off-screen issues. However, it does not explicitly state when alternatives like real_click (for realistic events) or double_click should be preferred, leaving some ambiguity for an AI agent.

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