Trigger a middle-click action on a specified UI element to open links in new tabs or close tabs, using accessibility-first automation and falling back to screen coordinates when needed.
Middle-click a target.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| target | Yes | ||
| strategy | No | ||
| modifiers | No | ||
| return_state | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.14Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the action without mentioning side effects, system requirements, accessibility implications, or what happens after the click.
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 short and front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It contains only a single sentence that restates the tool's basic action and omits almost all useful information.
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?
With four parameters, a nested target object, no output schema, no annotations, and many closely related sibling tools, this description is severely insufficient. An agent cannot reliably construct a correct call or distinguish middle-click behavior from other click tools.
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%, and the description adds no meaning to any parameter. The nested target object, strategy, modifiers, and return_state fields are left completely unexplained.
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 states a specific action ('Middle-click') and a resource ('a target'), and the tool name plus sibling list makes it clear this is the middle-click variant among left/right/double/triple click. However, it does not define what 'target' means or how it is specified, which slightly limits clarity.
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?
There is no guidance about when to use middle_click versus triple_click, right_click, double_click, or other input tools. No context, exclusions, or alternatives are mentioned, so an agent must infer usage entirely from the name and schema.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.