ByteBot MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions scrolling to navigate but fails to disclose key behavioral traits such as scroll increment size, screen boundaries, potential delays, or what happens if content is unavailable. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves in practice.

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 two concise sentences with zero waste: the first states the action and target, the second provides usage intent. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary details.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a tool that performs a UI action (scrolling), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error conditions, visual feedback, or interaction with other tools (e.g., bytebot_screenshot). For a UI navigation tool, more context is needed to ensure proper usage.

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 clear documentation for direction and count parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema (e.g., no examples of when to use specific directions or counts). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 action ('scroll') and target ('the screen') with a specific purpose ('to navigate through content'). It distinguishes from siblings like bytebot_click or bytebot_move_mouse by focusing on scrolling, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from potential overlapping tools (e.g., no mention of how it differs from bytebot_drag for navigation).

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 implies usage for navigation through content, providing some context, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like bytebot_drag or bytebot_move_mouse for similar purposes. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage somewhat open-ended.

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