Click

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

The description goes well beyond annotations by detailing real trusted mouse events, automatic scrolling into view, overlay warnings, and exactly what the tool returns (navigation, new tabs, dialogs, console errors). This gives the agent a clear picture of side effects and outcome reporting.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste: action first, then behavioral safeguards, then return values. Front-loaded and appropriately sized.

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 browser click tool with no output schema and moderate complexity, the description covers the action, side effects, and return format comprehensively. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all seven parameters including enums and defaults. The description adds only high-level targeting context (ref vs. point) but no param-specific details beyond what the schema provides, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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 (clicks) and resource (element by ref or viewport point), making the action unambiguous. It does not explicitly name sibling tools like hover or drag to differentiate, but the distinction is implicit from the action itself.

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?

Usage is implied by the action and the two targeting modes (ref vs. point), but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose click over alternatives such as hover or drag. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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