cdp_click

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does disclose support for right/middle click, double-click, and modifier keys, adding value beyond the schema. However, it omits important behavioral traits such as whether the click triggers navigation, requirements like element visibility, or what happens on failure. The force parameter is also not explained in either the schema or description.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the primary purpose and directly enumerates variants. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the tool has 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides a solid overview but leaves gaps: it does not mention the force parameter, mutual exclusivity of selector vs coordinates, prerequisites like an active session, or potential side effects. It is adequate for basic usage but incomplete for edge cases.

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 only 25%, with descriptions for session_id and click_count. The description compensates by explaining the semantics of selector, x, y, button, modifiers, and double-click (via click_count). It does not explain the force parameter, but overall it adds significant meaning beyond the sparse schema.

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 clearly states the tool clicks an element by CSS selector or at page coordinates, and lists supported variants (right/middle click, double-click, modifier keys). It distinguishes from sibling tools like cdp_hover or cdp_type by focusing specifically on click actions.

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 implies when to use the tool: whenever a click is needed. It explains the two usage modes (selector or coordinates) and available options, but does not explicitly exclude cases or compare to alternatives like cdp_press for keyboard events. This is clear context but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative guidance.

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