human_mouse_click

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: the call waits for completion (synchronous), requires the cursor to already be in the client, and warns that the target must be freshly established to avoid stale UI.

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 tight sentences: the action is front-loaded, followed by the critical preconditions. Nothing is wasted.

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?

The essential behavior and preconditions are covered, but with 8 parameters at 0% schema coverage and no output schema, an agent lacks guidance on the optional tuning parameters. Adequate for the core action, but not complete for correct parameterization.

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% across 8 parameters, including a nested pause_policy object with 7 undocumented fields. The description only implies that x/y are client coordinates and hwnd is the target client; it says nothing about jitter_px, duration_ms, overshoot_px, threshold_px, or pause tuning.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Move to a client point and pulse the left button once,' which clearly distinguishes a click from a move-only sibling like human_mouse_move. It does not explicitly name an alternative, but the action itself is 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?

It states clear preconditions — the cursor must already be inside the target client, and the caller must freshly establish the intended UI target. There are no explicit exclusions or named alternatives, but the usage context is well defined.

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