nex_browser_click

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action, offering no details about side effects (e.g., page state changes), waiting behavior, error handling if the element is not found, or whether it scrolls into view. For a browser automation click, these are important traits that remain undisclosed.

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 with no filler words. It is front-loaded with the action verb and immediately specifies the target. Every word earns its place, making it an excellent example of concise, effective description.

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?

For a simple click tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the essential purpose but lacks critical context such as return value, error behavior, or reactivity to page changes. It is minimally viable but leaves several behavioral questions unanswered, particularly about what happens after a click or if the element is not actionable.

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 60% (3 of 5 parameters described). The description adds some value by mentioning 'latest snapshot or CSS selector' which aligns with the target parameter, and 'Click or double-click' hints at the doubleClick parameter. However, it does not elaborate on button or pageId/sessionId beyond the schema, leaving those partially covered. It does not fully compensate for the gap but is not entirely silent.

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 action ('Click or double-click') and the target resource ('an element from the latest snapshot or a CSS selector'). It uses a specific verb and resource, and it is distinct from sibling tools like hover, type, or drag. This is a textbook clear purpose.

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 provides clear context: use this tool when you need to click an element. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not scenarios, but the verb 'click' inherently signals the appropriate use case. There are no misleading or ambiguous instructions, so it earns credit for clear context even without explicit exclusions.

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