click_interact

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses chain-penetration via iframe_selector, coordinate_space semantics, detail output control, and the tri-state visualize. It also outlines return structure including visual_effects and observation components, though it omits side effects or error handling.

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 information-dense but well-organized with semicolons, covering many aspects without redundancy. It could be slightly easier to scan, but every sentence adds value.

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 complexity (13 params, no annotations), the description covers targeting modes, output details, and navigation comparison. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to document return values exhaustively, but error behavior and wait conditions are absent.

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 compensate. It explains most key parameters: by, selector, role, name, x/y (through coordinate), coordinate_space, click_type, detail, visualize, and iframe_selector. It does not mention description or expected_result, but those are self-evident metadata fields.

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 opens with '统一点击工具' (unified click tool), clearly stating its function. It enumerates three targeting modes (css/xpath selector, role+name, coordinate) and mentions the ability to click inside VTable, distinguishing it from siblings like fill_input or execute_action_chain.

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 usage context by suggesting by=role for Portal popups and by=coordinate for VTable internal clicks, which helps select the mode. However, it does not explicitly compare with sibling tools or state when not to use the tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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