desktop_click

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It states the click action and button choices but doesn't disclose side effects, coordinate system origin, or behavior of the clicks parameter. The screenshot-first advice adds useful context, but the tool's potentially destructive nature on a live desktop is left implicit.

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 no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by the key usage prerequisite and button options. Every sentence 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?

For a 4-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimally sufficient but leaves gaps: coordinate system details, multi-click semantics, and safety caveats are absent. The screenshot-first instruction helps an agent avoid blind clicking, but the description could be more 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?

The description clarifies that x and y are screen coordinates and lists the allowed button values. However, the clicks parameter is never mentioned, and the button enum is already fully defined in the schema. With 0% schema description coverage, this is only partial compensation for the undocumented parameters.

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 ('Click') and resource ('screen coordinates'), clearly distinguishing this tool from siblings like desktop_move and desktop_key. The purpose is immediately understandable and unambiguous.

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 explicitly instructs to use desktop_screenshot first, providing an actionable precondition and workflow context. It doesn't name alternatives or exclusions, but for a low-level input primitive this is reasonable guidance.

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