click

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

Annotations provide only a title, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It states that a click occurs but not whether the tool first loads the provided URL into a new or existing session, whether the click may trigger navigation, or what wait_secs does after the click.

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 filler. It is appropriately concise, though it sacrifices useful context for brevity.

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 tool has no output schema and no behavioral annotations, and the sibling list includes a closely related session_click; the description does not explain the standalone click/session-click relationship, session behavior, or post-click waiting semantics. An agent cannot fully distinguish invocation context from this description.

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 schema already documents url, selector, and wait_secs. The description adds little beyond the CSS-selector mechanism; the baseline of 3 applies because the description does not need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 identifies the action ('Click') and the resource ('an element on a webpage') and specifies the mechanism (CSS selector). It is clear enough on its own, but it does not differentiate from the closely named sibling session_click, which appears to serve a related clicking use case.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus session_click or other session-based siblings. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative routing are given, leaving the agent to infer the intended context from the URL parameter alone.

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