linkedin_browser_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 burden, yet it only says what a click is. It does not disclose side effects (navigation, form submission, new page load), permission requirements, or what happens on failure, which matters for an action that mutates page state.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler that front-loads the action and then the two targeting modes. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter documentation, the description is thin for an interactive browser action. An agent gets no information about the result of the click, whether it waits for navigation, or how to obtain a valid ref, leaving a significant gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does partially by explaining that ref comes from a prior snapshot and that text is the element's visible text. However, it leaves ambiguity about whether the two parameters are mutually exclusive, which takes precedence if both are supplied, and why both are optional.

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 (element), and specifies the two ways to identify the target. It implicitly links to linkedin_browser_snapshot by requiring a ref from a previous snapshot, which helps distinguish it from the other browser_* siblings, but it does not name any sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the parenthetical '(de un snapshot previo)' hints that a snapshot must be taken first, which is a useful prerequisite. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to click by ref vs. by visible text, and no mention of alternatives such as linkedin_browser_type or linkedin_browser_navigate.

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