browse_click

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says only that clicking occurs and does not disclose whether it scrolls into view, waits for the element, handles navigation, or how failures are surfaced.

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 single sentence is compact and front-loaded with the action. There is no wasted wording, though the structure gives no cues for parameter usage or edge cases.

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 browser-click mutation with three undocumented parameters and no annotations or output schema, the description is too thin to let an agent call it reliably. Missing details include which parameter selector to use, how nth applies, and expected waiting or error behavior.

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 explain the parameters. It partially clarifies selector and text, but the nth parameter is completely undocumented, and there is no explanation of precedence when both selector and text are provided.

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?

It states a specific verb and resource: click an element. It also names the two lookup modes, CSS selector or visible text, which makes the core action clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from nearby browser tools such as browse_press, browse_fill, or browse_select_option.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, when to prefer selector over text, or what prerequisites must hold. The intended use is implied by the verb, but no selection conditions are provided.

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