wb_click

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses a non-obvious behavior: automatic switching to newly opened tabs after click. It also highlights the followNewTab default. Missing details like wait behavior or error handling, but the main side effect is covered.

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, includes selector guidance, and explains the default tab behavior. Every word earns its place with no 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?

For a simple click tool with fully described parameters and no output schema, the description covers the primary behavior and the main side effect (tab switching). It doesn't explain return values, but that is unlikely to be critical for a click action.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by indicating that @e refs are preferred over CSS selectors, and reiterates the default tab-following behavior which complements the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 an element') with specific resource and selector preference. It distinguishes itself from siblings like wb_fill or wb_press_key by focusing on element clicking, and provides useful context about tab 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 gives clear context on how to use the tool ('@e ref preferred, or CSS') and the default tab-following behavior. It implicitly indicates when to use (for clicking elements) without explicit alternatives, but the context is sufficient for selection.

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