tap_screen

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It only says a click is performed; it does not mention side effects, permissions, failure conditions, or what happens after the tap, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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 short sentences with zero waste. The core action is front-loaded, and the coordinate-source guidance follows directly.

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 simple tap tool with an output schema and full schema coverage, the description supplies the action and the coordinate source. It is nearly complete, though it could mention alternatives or interaction side effects since no annotations are present.

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 schema already covers 100% of parameter descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful meaning by specifying that x and y should be dynamically obtained from get_ui_dump's bounds property, beyond the schema's minimal coordinate labels.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 在屏幕指定坐标执行点击操作 (perform a click at specified screen coordinates). It also references the sibling get_ui_dump as the coordinate source, which helps distinguish it, but it does not contrast with long_press or swipe_screen.

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 a clear prerequisite for obtaining coordinates from get_ui_dump's bounds, which implies when to use it after a UI dump. However, it does not state when to prefer tap_screen over alternatives like long_press or swipe_screen, nor any exclusions.

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