click_menu_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It only states the basic action and does not disclose error behavior, prerequisites (e.g., window focus), or what happens if the menu path is invalid.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the main action and key distinguishing feature. No wasted words.

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 6 parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It lacks guidance on window identification (hwnd vs pid vs processName vs titleContains), error handling, and return 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 coverage is 50% (3 of 6 params described). The description adds meaningful context for 'path' by specifying matching behavior (ignore accelerators, case-insensitive), which aids correct invocation.

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 tool invokes a native Windows menu item by menu path, and distinguishes from moving cursor or using keyboard shortcuts, which differentiates it from sibling tools like click_window and send_key.

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 implies use for menu navigation without cursor or keyboard, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like click_window, send_key, or type_text for menu access.

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