Fetch the most recent click's crosshair image and analysis—coordinates, deviation, suggested fix—to correct unresponsive UI actions without blind retries.
回看最近一次坐标点击的准星小图与结论（index=-1 最近，-2 上上次）。⭐ 什么时候用它：坐标点击之后界面没有预期反应（没弹窗、没跳转、没变化）时，先用它看清「刚才到底点在哪、程序算的偏差是多少、建议改点哪个坐标」，再据此修正重试；不要盲目重复点击（实测那是最容易把界面点花的做法），也不必重新截图重新估算。返回里含：落点坐标、当时程序算出的偏差与建议坐标、点后界面变化百分比。记录只保留本会话内最近 8 次坐标点击；元素级点击零坐标、不产生记录。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| index | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It states what the return contains (click coordinates, computed deviation, suggested coordinates, change percentage), and discloses retention limits (last 8 coordinate clicks) and an exclusion (element-level clicks produce no record).
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 dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose/index, when-to-use, return contents, and retention constraints. It is front-loaded with the core function and uses bold and an emoji for scannability without adding filler.
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?
Since there is no output schema and no annotations, the description must stand alone—and it does. It explains what the tool returns, when to use it, how the index parameter works, and data retention limits. Nothing needed for correct invocation or interpretation is missing.
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?
The schema provides only a default value of -1 with no description. The tool description adds complete semantic meaning: index=-1 is the most recent click, -2 is the one before that, and records are limited to the last 8 clicks. This fully compensates for the schema's 0% coverage.
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 action: review the crosshair image and conclusion of the most recent coordinate click, with index semantics explained. It clearly sets this apart from sibling tools like click or screenshot, which perform actions or capture screens rather than diagnose past clicks.
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 gives an explicit trigger condition: use it when a coordinate click produces no expected UI reaction (no popup, navigation, or change). It also tells the agent not to blindly repeat clicks and says re-screenshotting is unnecessary, which is direct, actionable usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.