browser_click

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful behavior: it scrolls the element into view and waits for it to be clickable, and it explains the main/support browser isolation. It omits failure behavior (selector not found, timeout limits) and any return indication, but the core interaction semantics are covered.

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?

Front-loads the action, then the behavior, then the alternative tool, then the parameter caveat. Four short sentences with no filler; each earns its place.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Combined with the disclosed wait/scroll behavior and browser isolation, the definition is nearly complete; only error/timeout handling is left implicit.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it clarifies first-match semantics for the selector and states that browser defaults to `main` while `support` is fully isolated. Only a brief note on selector syntax (CSS) is missing.

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?

States a specific verb (click) plus resource (first element matching a CSS selector) and explicitly differentiates itself from the sibling browser_click_at. An agent can pick between the two without opening either schema.

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?

Gives an explicit alternative and the condition that selects it: when no selector can describe the target, use browser_click_at with coordinates from browser_snapshot. It also clarifies the browser parameter default and that main/support contexts share nothing.

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