mouse_click

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

The description explains parameter behaviors (e.g., -1 for current position, button choices, click count) but does not disclose broader behavioral traits such as physical cursor movement, permission requirements, or side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden, but it covers only the immediate mechanics without deeper context.

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 concise and well-structured. It opens with a clear one-sentence summary, then uses a bulleted list for parameters. Every line provides essential information without redundancy, making it easy to scan.

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?

The description covers all necessary aspects for operating the tool: coordinates, button, and click count. Since an output schema exists, return values need not be described. The tool is simple and the documentation is complete for its scope, though it lacks environmental or safety notes, which prevents a perfect score.

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?

The schema provides no parameter descriptions, but the tool description fully compensates by explaining each parameter in detail, including the special meaning of -1 for x and y, the valid button options, and the meaning of clicks. This adds significant value beyond the raw schema.

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 tool's function: 'Click the mouse at the given coordinates.' It specifies the action (click) and the resource (mouse coordinates), effectively distinguishing it from siblings like mouse_move or keyboard_type. The purpose is explicit and 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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the name and description make the primary use case obvious, there is no mention of exclusions or alternative tools for similar tasks. Usage context is implied but not stated.

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