tap_element

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true (side effects) and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that it 'raises if no match is found', which is helpful. However, it does not disclose visibility requirements or scrolling behavior. The description complements annotations but does not go beyond them significantly.

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?

Two sentences with the main action and error condition front-loaded. No unnecessary words. Every sentence is essential.

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 six parameters and zero schema descriptions, the description is incomplete. It does not explain search logic, parameter combinations, or required device_id. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for missing input documentation.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must explain parameters. It briefly mentions 'by attribute(s)' but does not explain any of the six parameters (e.g., what 'exact' means, or how attributes combine). This leaves the agent to guess from parameter names alone.

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 action (find and tap), the resource (UI element), and the method (by attributes). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'tap' (coordinate-based) and 'find_element' (find only) by including both find and tap in one action.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'tap' or 'double_tap'. It implies attribute-based search but does not exclude coordinate-based tapping or suggest prerequisites.

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