click

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and explains what the tool returns and how to interpret the Changed line (url change / new elements / nothing). It does not discuss error handling or waiting behavior, but the disclosed effect-reporting is meaningful behavioral 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?

Two focused sentences front-load the core action and then explain the return behavior without any filler. Every clause earns its place.

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?

For a two-parameter interaction tool with an output schema, the description covers input source, parameter behavior, and result semantics. Minor gaps remain around invalid-index behavior and page-loading side effects, but nothing critical for basic invocation is missing.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by clarifying that index refers to an element from the latest snapshot and that include_snapshot=false produces a compact change summary. It stops short of specifying indexing details such as zero-based vs one-based, but adds clear meaning to both parameters.

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 first sentence uses a specific verb ('Click') and resource ('element with the given index from the latest snapshot'), making the action unambiguous. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like snapshot, navigate, and type_text without needing to name them.

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 establishes the prerequisite of using an index from the latest snapshot, so an agent knows it must have a fresh snapshot before calling. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the operational context is clear.

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