browser_click

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the cursor moves visibly and the click is real CDP Input, but it omits side effects like navigation or form submission, failure behavior, waiting behavior, and what the snapshot parameter changes.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. Efficient and easy to scan, though quite terse for a tool with seven optional parameters.

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?

There are 7 optional parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description does not explain click side effects, parameter interactions, or return behavior. For a browser interaction tool of this complexity, the description is incomplete.

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 71%, so the schema documents most parameters already. The description only restates that the target can be a ref or x,y coordinates, adding no extra meaning for button, modifiers, clickCount, or snapshot.

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 and resource: 'hace clic real ... sobre un ref o x,y', and adds that it is a real click via CDP Input with visible cursor movement. It distinguishes itself implicitly from browser_move, though it does not name any sibling tool explicitly.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as browser_drag, browser_element_at, or browser_type. It also does not say when to prefer ref versus x,y, or whether a snapshot must be taken first.

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