mouse_click

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

The description reveals important behavioral details beyond annotations: background targeting uses Win32 PostMessage to avoid focusing the window, and x/y become client coordinates then. Annotations indicate non-readonly and non-destructive, and the description adds significant context without contradiction.

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 well-structured with separate paragraphs for normal click and background targeting. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. Could be more concise but remains effective.

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 tool's complexity (two modes, multiple parameters), the description covers both normal and background clicks, explains the return format, and addresses key parameter behavior. It does not explicitly mention parameter mutuality (hwnd vs window_title) but that is implied.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 0% per context, the input schema actually includes descriptions for all parameters. The tool description adds value by explaining usage patterns for key parameters (clicks, x/y, hwnd, window_title) that go beyond the schema's brief descriptions.

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 a mouse button, optionally at a specific coordinate.' It covers double-click and background targeting, and the verb+resource is distinct from siblings like mouse_drag, mouse_move, and mouse_scroll.

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 background targeting (set hwnd or window_title) and that omitting x/y clicks at current position. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives for other mouse actions, 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.