computer_click

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It states the core action and target, which implies a press-and-release click, but it does not mention pointer movement, single-click semantics, or side effects. This is minimally adequate for a simple action but adds little beyond the tool name.

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 some useful behavioral context by being so minimal.

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 parameters are fully documented and an output schema exists, so the description doesn't need to explain return values. However, for an agent choosing among many sibling input tools, the absence of contrast or usage guidance leaves a minor completeness gap.

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%, with x/y documented as pixel coordinates and button documented with options and a default. The description adds only the phrase 'screen coordinates' and does not need to compensate for missing schema information.

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 concrete verb ('Click') and a specific target ('specified screen coordinates'). The action and resource are clear, though it doesn't explicitly contrast itself with siblings like computer_double_click or computer_mouse_down/up.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus computer_double_click, computer_move, computer_mouse_down/up, or other input tools. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or explicit context for choosing this action.

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