double_click

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply states the action without mentioning whether the element must be visible, whether coordinates are relative to the element, whether it dispatches a dblclick event, or any side effects.

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 a single, concise sentence with no fluff. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse, though it sacrifices substance for brevity.

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?

Although the tool is simple and an output schema exists, the description omits crucial context: no mention of coordinate behavior, return values, or when to use this over 'click'. The lack of any explanatory detail makes it insufficiently complete for reliable agent selection.

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 provides no additional meaning for the parameters. The element_id target, x/y coordinates, and their relationship are left entirely to the schema's bare names, so the description does not compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 action ('Double-click') and the resource ('an element'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'click' by specifying 'double-click', though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool vs 'click' or other interaction tools. It does not describe prerequisites, typical scenarios, or situations where double-clicking is appropriate.

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