click_visible_elements

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavior and succeeds in disclosing key traits: only currently-visible elements are clicked, clicks happen in order, and limit=0 removes the limit. It does not mention potential side effects of many clicks or behavior on no matches, but the core behavior is well disclosed.

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 one efficient sentence with a parenthetical example and a tersely stated limit rule. Every phrase adds value and the core action is front-loaded.

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 two-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is largely complete: it explains what gets clicked, the visibility restriction, ordering, and the limit behavior. It could ideally state what happens when nothing matches, but that gap is minor.

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 0%, so the description must add meaning. It adds important semantics for `limit` ('limit=0 means no limit') but says little about `selector` beyond 'matching a selector,' leaving the exact selector syntax or expected format to be inferred.

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 verb and resource: 'Click every currently-visible element matching a selector, in order.' It also gives a concrete example (checkboxes) and clarifies limit=0 means no limit, making the tool's distinct purpose immediately clear even among many siblings.

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 phrase 'every currently-visible element' and the example 'checking every checkbox on a page' clearly imply this tool is for batch-clicking all matching visible elements rather than clicking a single element. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, so it stops short of full guidance.

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