ff_click

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only mentions the bridge add-on prerequisite but lacks details on what happens if the selector is not found, if the click triggers navigation, or any destructive effects.

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 two concise sentences. The first sentence states the action and resource, the second adds essential context about the environment, with no wasted words.

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 the simplicity of the tool (2 parameters, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate but lacks details on error handling, return values, and explicit guidance on when to choose this over siblings like 'click' or 'ff_type'.

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%, requiring the description to compensate. The description explains that 'selector' is a CSS selector, but does not mention the 'tabId' parameter or its optionality, leaving ambiguity.

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 clicks an element using a CSS selector in a real tab, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from the sibling 'click' by specifying that it operates on a real running Firefox instance with a bridge add-on.

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 context for when to use the tool: when you have a real Firefox with the bridge add-on loaded. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like the generic 'click' tool.

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