browser_scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers little: it discloses only that a zero delta is invalid, but says nothing about whether the scroll is instant or animated, whether it waits for load, what state it mutates, or what it returns.

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?

A single zero-waste sentence with the key constraint front-loaded. Brevity is appropriate for a trivial operation, though the terseness leaves gaps that are penalized elsewhere.

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-optional-parameter utility with no output schema, the description is minimally adequate, but an agent still lacks any statement of preconditions or post-scroll state, which matters when orchestrating a browser session.

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 100% and both deltas are documented with direction and sign conventions, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds only the 'nonzero' constraint, which is a marginal but real addition.

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 (scroll) and resource (the page) with the delta semantics of the operation. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like browser_navigate or browser_click, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with 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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., must a page be open first?), and no mention of how scroll interacts with browser_navigate or browser_read. The only inferred guidance is the 'nonzero' wording.

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