CoachingPortal MCP Server

coachingportal_click

Clicks a numbered element on the current CoachingPortal page using the element number from the last read, enabling AI agents to interact with portal content during approved workflows.

Instructions

Click a numbered element on the current CoachingPortal page.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "element": "<element>"
    },
    "name": "coachingportal_click"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`element`	Yes	Element number from the last read.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and does not meet it. It does not say whether clicking navigates away, mutates page state, returns new page content, or what happens if the element number is stale or invalid — all critical for an agent deciding whether to click.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

One front-loaded sentence with zero filler and no redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification for a state-changing browser action rather than being a model of tight completeness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For an interaction tool with no annotations and no output schema, the definition leaves the agent guessing about the post-click state, return value, and failure modes. The parameter story is complete thanks to the schema, but the behavioral story is not.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is fully documented in the schema with a minimum and a description tying it to the last read. The description only echoes 'numbered', adding no format or validity detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description pairs a concrete verb ('Click') with a concrete resource and scope ('a numbered element on the current CoachingPortal page'), which is unambiguous about the action being taken. It implicitly distinguishes itself from read/type/close siblings by being the selection action, but never names those siblings explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'current page' and the schema's 'Element number from the last read' together suggest the read-then-click workflow. There is no explicit when-to-use versus coachingportal_type or coachingportal_read, and no stated preconditions such as needing a fresh read first.

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

Deploy Server