setmore_click

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It does convey meaningful behavior by scoping the action to the "current" page, which signals state-dependence on a prior read, but it says nothing about side effects such as navigation or DOM changes, failure behavior for stale or out-of-range indices, or what the tool returns.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the verb and target arrive immediately. It is efficient though very terse, leaving no room for the qualifying context an agent would benefit from.

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?

Complexity is low (one required integer, no nesting, no output schema), so the definition is minimally viable. Still, for a UI-interaction tool the agent is left guessing about post-click state, whether the element list must be refreshed, and what a successful call yields.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter is self-documenting ("Element number from the last read", minimum 1). The description's "numbered element" is consistent with that but adds no new syntax, range, or staleness rules, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ("click") and a specific resource ("a numbered element on the current Setmore page"), which contrasts naturally with siblings like setmore_type and setmore_read. It stops short of explicitly naming a sibling or declaring the boundary, so it lands at a clear-but-not-differentiated 4.

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 phrase "numbered element" plus the schema hint of "from the last read" implies usage: read first, then click an index. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over setmore_type or setmore_open, no note on what to do after a click (re-read?), and no exclusion conditions.

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