dblclick

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

No annotations are provided, leaving the description the sole behavior source, but it only says 'Double-click,' offering no details about side effects (e.g., moving the mouse, waiting for visibility) or the result. It does not disclose whether the tool focuses the element first, whether it dispatches events, or whether it has side effects like toggling state or triggering both click and dblclick signals.

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 a single short sentence with no filler or redundant metadata, making it easy to parse. It front-loads the specific action and keeps the whole thing free of cumbersome detail.

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 a sufficiently parameter-rich schema (100%) and no output schema, the description is a straightforward tool description that will let a model invoke it. However, the context is still minimal—there's no reference on how failures are reported, how it handles hidden elements, or why it should be chosen over click, so a small but meaningful completeness gap remains.

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?

Parameter descriptions in the schema provide 100% coverage of the index, lease, session, target, and timeout_ms, so the description's job for parameters is light. It only adds a redundant note that the target can be '@eN ref or CSS selector,' the exact phrasing already in the target property.

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 clear verb, 'double-click,' and a resource type, '@eN ref or CSS selector,' making the action comprehensible. It doesn't explicitly contrast with tools like 'click' or 'hover' in the sibling list, so it's clear on its own but not as differentiated as a description that names the alternative.

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 offers no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no reference to related tools such as 'click', 'hover', or 'press'. There is also no mention if it should be used with a specific session or selectors or if it plays a specialized role among the sibling tools.

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