click

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

No annotations provided, so the description fully covers behavior: it describes the coordinate system (top-left origin), button mapping (1=left, 2=middle, 3=right), observe behavior (returns state in same call), settle_ms waiting (up to 5000ms), and failure condition (isError if instance down). This exceeds transparency expectations.

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 moderately concise with three sentences packing essential info. It front-loads the main action and parameters, but the second sentence about return values could be slightly more streamlined. Overall, every sentence earns its place.

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 6 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers all parameters, return values, and failure semantics. No significant gaps remain for an AI agent to invoke correctly.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates fully: it explains x,y as absolute pixel coords, button as integer with meaning, observe as 'screenshot'/'parse' for state, settle_ms as wait time with suggested range, and instance as targeted instance. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare 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 explicitly states 'Click at absolute pixel coords (top-left origin) in an instance', providing a specific verb ('click') and resource ('instance'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'click_element' (which clicks UI elements) and 'double_click', making the purpose clear.

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 gives usage context: 'use 400–1500 after anything that navigates or submits' for settle_ms, and explains that observe values 'screenshot'/'parse' save a round-trip. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus alternatives like 'click_element', though sibling names imply the distinction.

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