chrome_click

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure, but it only states the action without revealing side effects like potential page navigation, error handling if the element is not found, or whether it scrolls into view. Clicking is a mutating operation, yet the description offers no safety or failure information.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and method. There is zero wasted language, and the structure is appropriately compact for the tool's simplicity.

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?

Despite full schema coverage, the description provides no context about return values, error scenarios, or the relationship between x/y and selector. The tool has 5 parameters and no annotations or output schema, yet the description offers only a bare action statement, 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?

The schema covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, only reiterating the selector/coordinates distinction without explaining precedence or interaction between parameters.

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's action ('Click') and its resource ('an element') with explicit methods ('by CSS selector or coordinates'), making it distinct from sibling tools like chrome_type or chrome_scroll. It is specific and unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor on prerequisites such as an active tab or page load state. The description implies usage for clicking but does not explain when to choose coordinates over selector or mention that the element must exist.

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