Clicks a button or link on the current page to trigger actions like Next, Submit, or Continue, then reports URL changes or new content.
Click a button or link on the current page (e.g., Next, Submit, Continue). Returns whether the page URL changed or new content appeared.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| selector | Yes | CSS selector for the element to click | |
| description | No | What this click does (for logging, e.g. 'Next step') |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v3.2.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions that it returns whether the URL changed or new content appeared, but does not disclose typical side effects, potential navigation away, or required page state. The click action's destructive/irreversible nature is not addressed.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and examples, no wasted words. The return behavior is stated in a second brief sentence.
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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal. It covers the basic action and return hint, but misses prerequisites (e.g., page must be loaded), error conditions (e.g., element not found), and any timing/waiting behavior. Adequate but incomplete.
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 parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, but baseline for full coverage is 4. However, the description does not clarify how the 'description' parameter should be used beyond what the schema says.
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?
States a specific verb (Click) and resource (button or link on the current page) with concrete examples (Next, Submit, Continue). It also mentions the return value (URL change or content appearance).
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?
Implies usage context (clicking on current page) but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like fill_form_field or open_application_page. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.