riddle_click_and_screenshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: 'Uses force-click by default to handle animated buttons' explains a default behavior not obvious from the schema. However, it doesn't mention error handling, timeout behavior, screenshot format, or what happens if the selector isn't found. For a mutation tool (clicks change state), more behavioral context would be helpful.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core functionality. Every sentence adds value: the first states the exact workflow, the second provides usage context and a key behavioral detail. There's zero wasted verbiage.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and 5 parameters (with 80% schema coverage), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic workflow and one behavioral trait, but for a tool that performs actions (load, click, screenshot) with multiple parameters, it lacks details on output format, error conditions, and the purpose of the 'device' parameter. The context is incomplete for confident use.

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 80%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter semantics beyond the schema: it implies the 'click' parameter is for interactive elements like buttons, and mentions 'force-click by default' which relates to the 'force' parameter. However, it doesn't explain the 'device' enum options or provide additional context for 'wait_ms' beyond the schema's default value.

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 description clearly states the specific action sequence: 'load URL, click a selector, take screenshot.' It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on single-click automation (vs. batch_screenshot, run_script, or generic screenshot). The phrase 'Good for testing button clicks, game starts, etc.' further clarifies the use case.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool: 'Good for testing button clicks, game starts, etc.' It implies this is for simple automation scenarios. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among the sibling tools (e.g., when to choose riddle_batch_screenshot instead).

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