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 of behavioral disclosure, yet it discloses nothing beyond the literal click action. Side effects (e.g., waiting for navigation, 'intercepted' failures, ambiguity resolution via the index parameter) are left entirely to the schema, which is a significant gap for an interaction tool.

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?

A single efficient sentence with zero waste, front-loading the verb and target form. It is appropriately terse, though it perhaps errs on the side of being too spare.

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?

This is an interactive tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, yet the description provides none of the behavioral context an agent needs: what happens after a click, how 'intercepted' failures and retries work, or how target ambiguity is resolved via index. Incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description merely restates what the target parameter already says ('@eN ref or selector'), adding no new meaning beyond the schema.

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 ('Click') and resource (an @eN ref or CSS selector), which clearly identifies the operation. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like dblclick, check, or uncheck, but the name plus target-form hints make the purpose unmistakable.

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?

No guidance in the description on when to use this tool versus alternatives like dblclick, check, or hover. The session parameter hints at multi-step sequencing ('go→click→fill'), but the description body itself provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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