tor_click

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is covered. However, the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the selector method; it doesn't mention waiting behavior, scrolling into view, or potential page state changes. With annotations present, this is acceptable but not rich.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence that gets straight to the point. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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?

This is a simple click tool with two parameters, annotations, and an output schema. The annotations cover the destructive nature, and the output schema presumably documents return values. However, the lack of usage guidelines and limited parameter semantics leaves important context gaps, making it merely 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?

The description mentions 'by CSS selector', which clarifies that the selector parameter is a CSS selector, adding some meaning beyond the schema's string type. However, the timeout parameter is completely unaddressed. Given 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate more but only partially does.

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 uses a specific verb ('Click') and identifies the resource ('an element') and method ('by CSS selector'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like tor_type or tor_press_key, which have different actions.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tor_evaluate_js for clicking or tor_query_elements for locating elements. It also doesn't mention prerequisites or special conditions for use.

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