Click Element by Description

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

The description discloses matching criteria (visible text, aria-label, placeholder, name, id, parent context) and the non-guessing behavior when ambiguous. This adds significant value beyond annotations, which already indicate destructiveness. No contradictions.

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 concise but includes necessary details like examples and ambiguity handling. It could be slightly more structured, but it is clear and front-loaded with the action.

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 the complexity of an NL click tool, the description is comprehensive: it explains the action, matching sources, ambiguity resolution, and safety note. Despite an output schema existing, the description does not need to explain return values further.

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?

The sole parameter 'description' has 0% schema description coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining it is natural-language, providing examples, and detailing how it is matched. This is highly informative.

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 clicks the element best matching a natural-language description. Examples ('Login button', 'Add Task') make the purpose immediately obvious. It distinguishes from siblings like hover_what by focusing on clicking action.

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 explains when to use (natural-language description) and how ambiguity is handled (returns top candidates for rephrasing). It does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to alternatives like hover_what, but the context is clear.

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