bad-ass-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

click

Invoke a desktop UI element by handle ID, with optional right-click for context menus or double-click for list and tree items. Falls back to a real pointer click when no accessibility action exists.

Instructions

Click / invoke an element. Get handle_id from find_elements() or get_tree().

A plain left single click invokes the element's accessibility action (foreground-independent, does not steal focus). If the element exposes no actionable pattern, it falls back to a real pointer click at the element's center, so custom-drawn panels and tab strips that only highlight on a11y Select still get activated.

button="right" opens context menus; clicks=2 is a real double-click (opens list rows / tree items whose a11y invoke only selects them). Both always use real pointer events at the element's center, so make sure the window is on top for those.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "handle_id": "<handle_id>"
    },
    "name": "click"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`button`	No	left
`clicks`	No
`handle_id`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses that a plain click is foreground-independent and does not steal focus, that a pointer fallback fires when no actionable pattern exists, and that right-click/double-click always use real pointer events requiring the window on top. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent could not infer from the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The core action and prerequisite are front-loaded in the first two sentences, and the subsequent paragraphs each add distinct information about fallback and non-default options. Some phrasing ("so custom-drawn panels and tab strips that only highlight on a11y Select still get activated") is more illustrative than strictly necessary, but nothing is filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 3-parameter mutation-ish interaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers interaction semantics, fallback paths, and focus/window requirements thoroughly. It omits what happens on failure (invalid or stale handle_id) and whether anything is returned, which are the remaining gaps an agent might want.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does for most parameters: handle_id's provenance is stated, button="right" is explained, and clicks=2 is described as a real double-click with its purpose. It never enumerates the accepted button values (it only implies "left" via "plain left single click") and doesn't say what clicks=1 means beyond the default.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Click / invoke an element" gives a specific verb and resource, and the second sentence immediately states the prerequisite ("Get handle_id from find_elements() or get_tree()"). The mention of invoking accessibility actions and falling back to pointer clicks at the element center makes clear this is handle-targeted clicking, which distinguishes it functionally from a coordinate-based sibling like click_at.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Strong conditional guidance: it explains when the a11y invoke path is used, when the pointer fallback triggers (custom-drawn panels, tab strips), and when to choose button="right" or clicks=2, including the prerequisite that the window must be on top. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool (e.g. click_at) for coordinate-based needs, so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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

Deploy Server