browser_click

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds nothing beyond the action itself: it does not explain side effects like form submission, navigation, or permission prompts for specific elements.

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 short sentence with no wasted words. However, for a tool with six parameters and multiple sibling interactions, such extreme brevity means it is under-specified rather than ideally concise.

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 schema and annotations are rich enough to cover parameter details and safety hints, but the description still omits essential context for correct invocation: when clicking is appropriate versus dragging or hovering, and what side effects to expect on a live page. No output schema exists, so return values do not need explanation, but behavioral and selection guidance are missing.

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 100%, so the input schema fully documents all six parameters, including ref, button, modifiers, sessionId, and doubleClick. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb ('click') and resource ('web page'), so the core action is immediately clear. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like browser_drag, browser_hover, or browser_type, leaving the agent to infer when clicking is preferred over those alternatives.

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 offers no guidance on when to use browser_click versus alternatives such as browser_drag, browser_hover, or browser_type. It also omits any prerequisites, such as obtaining a valid element reference from a page snapshot before clicking.

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