Clicks a numbered element on the current StreamElements page by using the element number from the last read to select and activate the intended control.
Click a numbered element on the current StreamElements page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| element | Yes | Element number from the last read. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, yet it says nothing about side effects: whether the click navigates to a new page, submits a form, mutates state, or invalidates the numbering returned by the last read. For an interaction tool that can trigger arbitrary page actions, this is a major gap.
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 or redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification given the tool's side-effecting nature.
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?
With no annotations, no output schema, and side effects undisclosed, an agent cannot tell what state exists after the click or whether it needs to re-read the page before the next action. For an interaction primitive in a stateful browser-automation suite, that omission leaves a critical decision point uncovered.
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 schema already defines 'element' as an integer >= 1 taken from the last read. The description's phrase 'numbered element' restates that without adding format, range, or failure-mode context, so the baseline of 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 concrete verb (click) and a concrete target (a numbered element on the current StreamElements page), which is enough to distinguish it from streamelements_read, streamelements_type, and streamelements_open. It does not explicitly call out the sibling it is not, but the action is unambiguous.
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 never says when to click versus type, open, or close, nor does it state the precondition that element numbers come from a prior read — that hint lives only in the parameter schema. An agent must infer the read-then-click workflow and any freshness requirement on its own.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.