computer.right_click

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action and defers target rules to computer.click; it does not disclose side effects, whether verification is supported, or any potential failure modes.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler. Referencing computer.click avoids repeating a long list of target rules, keeping it appropriately 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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented verify parameter, the description leaves critical context undeclared. An agent would need to inspect sibling tool descriptions or schemas to understand target rules and verification behavior.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds some meaning by pointing out target rules match computer.click, but it does not explain the target format or the purpose of the verify parameter.

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 ('Right-click') and the resource ('a UI element'), so an agent can tell the tool performs a right-click action. It references computer.click for target rules, which is useful for understanding intent, but it relies on a sibling tool for detail rather than fully defining its own scope.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use right-click versus click, double-click, or other input tools. It does not mention common use cases like opening a context menu or when not to use this tool.

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