wpf_click_element

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

No annotations exist, so the description fully bears the burden. It discloses side effects: physical click moves cursor, brings window forward, auto-scrolls; double/right clicks are always physical. It also labels the tool as STATE-CHANGING. This is comprehensive.

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 moderately concise; every sentence adds value. It is front-loaded with the core action and structured with parameter details. Minor redundancy could be trimmed, but overall effective.

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 output schema, the description does not mention return values or error handling. However, it covers usage modes, parameter details, and behavioral nuances. For a simple click tool, this is mostly complete.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It covers physical (boolean, default false), click_type (string, default null, listing 'single', 'double', 'right'), but element_handle is only mentioned as required without further explanation. Slightly incomplete, but valuable.

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 clicks a UI element, enumerates supported control types (buttons, menu items, etc.), and distinguishes two modes (UI Automation vs physical click). This specificity and resource identification earn a 5.

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 explicit when-to-use guidelines: default vs physical click, click types (single, double, right), and after-action tips (use wpf_capture_screenshot for context menus). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the guidance is effective.

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