browser_click

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains how to target an element but says nothing about side effects, navigation, waiting behavior, or error handling. The iframe chaining detail is more parameter guidance than behavioral context, leaving the post-click outcome unspecified.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by a precise iframe usage note. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or redundancy.

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?

For a simple 2-parameter tool, this is minimally adequate: it covers the basic click action and frame handling. However, without annotations or output schema, it lacks guidance on choosing this ref-based click over sibling click variants and does not explain expected return values or errors.

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 100% and already documents both parameters, including the chaining syntax for nested frames. The description's frameSelector mention largely restates schema content, adding no significant extra semantics.

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 uses a specific verb ('Click') and clearly identifies the target as an element by ref from the snapshot. This distinguishes it from coordinate-based, locator-based, or text-based click tools among the siblings.

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 clear context for when to use this tool ('by ref from the snapshot') and provides concrete iframe usage instructions with chaining syntax. It does not explicitly exclude or compare against sibling click tools, but the ref-based condition implicitly defines its niche.

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