browser_click_locator

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the locator-based approach and frame handling, and notes enabledOnly to click the first enabled match. However, it omits behavior like waiting for actionability, scrolling, error handling on no match, or navigation consequences, which is a notable 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?

Three concise sentences. The core purpose is front-loaded, and every sentence provides essential usage guidance without 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 10-parameter tool with no annotations, the description covers the crucial aspects: primary locator modes, iframe handling, and optional parameters. It doesn't mention timeout or force, but those are well-documented in the schema, and overall the description is sufficient for typical 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 coverage is 100%, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds value by enforcing the 'provide one of' rule and clarifying semantics for nth, enabledOnly, and scopeCss beyond what the schema states.

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 it clicks by Playwright locator, and outlines the specific locator strategies (role+name, text, css). This distinguishes it from coordinate-based or text-evaluation click tools among its 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?

It gives concrete usage instructions: use frameSelector for iframes, omit for main page, and provide one of role+name, text, or css. It does not explicitly compare against alternative click tools like browser_click or browser_evaluate_click, but the intended usage is clear.

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