Mouse click

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-readonly, non-destructive, non-idempotent action, so the safety profile is covered. The description's one useful addition is that the click occurs at the existing cursor position rather than at a supplied coordinate. It does not disclose latency, focus requirements, or how the click interacts with the target window.

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?

One sentence, action first, prerequisite in the parenthetical. Every clause carries information and there is no filler.

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 prerequisite is covered and annotations carry the safety profile, with no output schema needed for a fire-and-forget input action. Gaps remain around what 'double' does and whether the click targets the focused window, which an agent needs 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 only 50%: 'button' has an enum and default, but 'double' is a bare boolean with no explanation anywhere. The description mentions neither parameter, so it adds nothing to compensate for the undocumented half.

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?

States a specific verb (click) and the target (current cursor position), which clearly separates it from mouse_move, the sibling it explicitly names. The scope is unambiguous, though nothing states that this is a synthetic input event rather than a UI query.

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?

Gives an explicit prerequisite: position with 'mouse_move absolute' first, and flags the NUI case where this matters. It stops short of saying when not to use click (e.g. vs. press_key or hold_key), so it is clear context without exclusions.

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