pilot_click

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses double-click capability, mouse button choices, return value (confirmation with ref and URL), and three specific errors with causes and remedies. Comprehensive.

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?

Well-structured: purpose first, then usage context, parameter details, return value, and errors. No redundant sentences, each sentence serves a purpose. Appropriately sized.

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 3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, usage, parameters, return, errors, and sibling routing. Complete and actionable.

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%, but description adds value beyond schema: explains ref can be from snapshot or CSS selector with examples, clarifies button enum values, and describes double_click effect. Adds parameter semantics.

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 'Click an element on the page using a ref from pilot_snapshot or a CSS selector.' It specifies the action (click) and resource (element). Mentions auto-routing for <option> to pilot_select_option, distinguishing from siblings.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'when the user wants to press a button, follow a link, check a checkbox...' Also hints at alternatives via errors (e.g., use pilot_scroll for non-clickable elements). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use statements.

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