simscale_click

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

The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: it requires a 'unique visible' element and mandates confirm_action=true for mutating/compute labels. It does not contradict the annotations (readOnly, destructive hints) and provides actionable context, though it omits details on failure modes or return values.

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 primary action, and every word adds value. The structure is clear and elegantly efficient.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the essential behavior and the key conditional (confirm_action). It doesn't detail error handling or multiple-match scenarios, but the openWorldHint and sibling context suggest a broader framework, so this is acceptable.

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 description explains the confirm_action parameter's role (required for mutating/compute labels), adding meaning beyond the schema which only gives a default. The target parameter is partially described in the schema, and the description recaps key selectors (role, label, text, test ID) without duplicating all details, compensating for the 50% schema coverage.

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 action (click), the target resource (SimScale control), and the selection criteria (role, label, text, or test ID). 'Unique visible' adds precise scope, and the confirmation requirement distinguishes it from sibling tools like simscale_press or simscale_fill.

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 implies when to use (when clicking a control) but does not explicitly direct users away from alternatives or mention when not to use. It mentions the confirm_action requirement for mutating/compute labels, which is a conditional, but no comparison with sibling tools.

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