simulate_mouse_click

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals that the click auto-releases to fire UI buttons and that the event is dropped if no game is running. However, it does not clarify behavior for edge cases like pressed=false, double_click, or the exact timing of events.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, target coordinates, and two key behavioral details without redundancy. Every clause contributes useful information.

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 description gives essential context (running game, viewport coordinates, auto-release) but omits details about parameter interactions and return behavior. Given the tool has six parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is only moderately complete.

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 description adds meaning for x/y as viewport pixels and for auto_release via 'auto-releasing', but leaves button, pressed, and double_click semantics undefined. With 0% schema description coverage, this is only partial compensation for the six parameters.

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's function: clicking a mouse button at viewport pixel coordinates in the running game. It distinguishes itself from sibling input tools like simulate_key and simulate_mouse_move by specifying click behavior and coordinate targeting.

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 for when to use the tool—clicking in a running game to trigger UI buttons—and implies it should be used for mouse clicks rather than keyboard or movement simulation. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is strong.

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