browser_clickAt

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions that clicking by coordinates is for elements not locatable by CSS, but does not disclose details such as whether the click is simulated, whether it scrolls the element into view, or whether it triggers events. This is moderate transparency.

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 concise and well-structured, stating the action, the condition for use, and example scenarios in a compact manner. No redundant words.

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 description adequately covers the tool's purpose and appropriate usage scenarios. It lacks details about edge cases (e.g., coordinates outside viewport) or return behavior, but given the simplicity of the operation, it is largely complete.

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 already provides descriptions for all parameters (coordinates relative to viewport, button options, click count). The tool description does not add extra semantic context beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool clicks at specified coordinates on the page, and provides typical use cases such as sliding captchas, popups, and canvas elements. It also distinguishes itself from element-based clicking by noting it is for elements that cannot be located with CSS selectors.

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 explicitly explains when to use this tool: when elements cannot be located via CSS selectors, and for scenarios like sliding captchas, popups, and canvas. This gives clear guidance on choosing this tool over alternatives like browser_click.

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