quick_click_cell

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 that the tool uses cached coordinates and does not re-identify the grid, indicating it may use stale data. However, it fails to mention what happens if the cache is invalid or outdated, or any potential errors.

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 very concise with one sentence and no fluff. It front-loads the usage condition in brackets. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

The description is fairly complete for a quick variant tool with one parameter. It explains when to use and what it does differently. However, it lacks details on failure modes (e.g., cache miss) and does not describe return values, which are absent from output schema.

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% (one parameter with description). The description adds context that the ref refers to a cell previously identified, but does not provide additional format or constraints beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is 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 clearly states the tool clicks a cell using cached coordinates and is intended for when the user explicitly requests quick/快速. It distinguishes from the sibling 'click_cell' by noting it does not re-identify the grid. However, it is brief and could elaborate on what 'cached coordinates' implies.

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 specifies when to use this tool: only when the user explicitly requests quick/快速. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, but the sibling tool 'click_cell' is implied as the alternative.

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