Click element

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It adds useful transparency by stating that the tool auto-waits for the element to be visible, stable, and actionable. However, it does not disclose possible side effects such as navigation, page changes, or failure behavior on timeout, so coverage is partial.

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 place the action first, then the key behavioral guarantee, then the targeting options. There is no filler, repetition of schema details, or unnecessary 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?

The combination of a rich parameter schema and this focused description covers the core knowledge an agent needs to call the tool correctly. The main gaps are the lack of alternative routing to state-change siblings and no statement of return/error behavior, but neither is critical for a straightforward click action.

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 100%, so the schema already documents sessionId, target, and timeoutMs in detail. The description adds only a light framing around CSS selectors and accessibility-first locators, which largely mirrors the schema's anyOf structure. It meets the baseline but does not add significant meaning beyond the 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Clicks an element in the session page.' It clearly identifies both the action and the target context. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling state-change tools such as check, uncheck, or select_option, so differentiation is mostly implicit.

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 auto-wait behavior and supported locator types suggest when the tool is appropriate, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives like check/uncheck for checkbox states or select_option for dropdowns, leaving the routing decision to inference.

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