ui_tap

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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only, open-world operation, but the description adds no behavioral context such as the effect of tapping, coordinate system, or press-and-hold behavior. It merely restates the action without enriching the agent's understanding.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler or repetition. It is front-loaded and directly states the action and context.

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 a good schema, the description is barely sufficient. It lacks coordinate system details, udid environment variable hints, and any mention of sibling tools. The openWorldHint annotation covers side effects, so the description need not repeat that, but it could benefit from usage context.

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 descriptions cover all 4 parameters (x, y, udid, duration) with 100% coverage, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description itself adds nothing beyond the schema, and there's a minor schema typo (y described as 'x-coordinate') that is not the description's responsibility.

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 ('Tap') and resource ('screen') within the iOS Simulator, clearly conveying the tool's core function. It is distinct from siblings like ui_swipe and ui_type, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ui_type or ui_swipe. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer when tap is appropriate.

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