ui_tap

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that selector-based tapping waits for the element and uses the first match, but it does not cover failure behavior, timeout outcomes, permissions, return values, or how multiple selector parameters interact.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves important operational details unstated.

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?

For a UI action tool with ten parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too thin. It omits selector precedence, coordinate-space expectations, timeout/failure behavior, and return semantics, leaving significant gaps for correct invocation.

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 all ten parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds only the selector-wait behavior and otherwise does not go beyond the schema's parameter explanations.

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 action and two invocation modes: tapping by coordinates or tapping the first element matching a selector. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly differentiate from nearby siblings such as ui_double_tap or ui_find.

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 implies two usage paths: coordinate tapping and selector-based tapping with waiting. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over ui_find, ui_double_tap, ui_wait, or other UI interaction tools, and no exclusions are stated.

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