Click-through, or clickwrap, agreements ask a user to take an affirmative action, such as checking a box or clicking a button, to signal assent to a set of online terms, in contrast to browsewrap agreements, which merely post terms somewhere on a site and infer assent from continued use without any affirmative action.

Courts assess enforceability by looking at whether the terms were reasonably conspicuous, whether the user's affirmative action was clearly and directly tied to those terms, whether the user had a genuine opportunity to review them before assenting, and whether material provisions, such as arbitration clauses or liability limitations, received reasonable notice rather than being buried.

In a simulation, click-through enforceability functions as a threshold gate: it determines whether downstream contractual defenses, such as a mandatory arbitration clause or a liability cap, are even available to the drafting party in the branch, since an unenforceable clickwrap agreement takes those defenses off the table entirely.

Companies design their signup and checkout flows deliberately, with clear presentation, an affirmative assent action, and an accessible terms link, to maximize enforceability. Litigators challenging clickwrap terms attack notice and conspicuousness, particularly for buried arbitration clauses or class-action waivers that a user is unlikely to have actually seen or understood.