Click element

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses two key behaviors: waiting for the element to be visible and enabled, and the lack of automatic retry with a rationale. However, it does not mention timeout behavior, scroll-into-view, or what happens if the element is not found.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value. No fluff or repetition.

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 tool's potential side effects (e.g., triggering navigation or form submission), the description is minimal. It does not mention return values, scroll behavior, or failure modes. It is adequate for a simple click but lacks completeness for an AI agent to fully anticipate outcomes.

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 50%, and the description adds no information about the parameters. It does not explain the 'frame' or 'selector' parameters beyond what is already in the schema. The description should compensate for the missing schema descriptions but fails to do so.

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 'Click an element after waiting for it to be visible and enabled,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'type' and 'select' by specifying the action and the precondition (visibility and enabled state).

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 explicitly warns that the operation is never retried automatically because a repeated click may submit or register data twice. This gives a clear usage caution about retries, though it does not explicitly compare to alternative tools or state when not to use click.

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