accuranker_click

Does 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 does not say whether clicking navigates, changes page state, waits for load, or what happens on an invalid element number.

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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording. Its length is appropriate for a simple one-parameter click tool.

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 simple one-parameter tool, the schema adequately documents the sole input and there is no output schema to explain. However, with no annotations, the description remains sparse about the required prior read workflow and the side effects of clicking.

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 100%: the schema already says 'Element number from the last read' with a minimum of 1. The description adds only 'numbered element' and no additional format, range, or workflow semantics beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Click' and object 'numbered element on the current AccuRanker page' make the action clear. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings such as accuranker_type or accuranker_read, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 the tool operates on the current page and that the element number comes from a prior read, with the schema reinforcing that. It gives no explicit when-to-use guidance versus accuranker_type or the read/open/close tools, and no exclusions.

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