scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the underlying gesture (swipe from screen middle) and directional semantics. It says nothing about what happens at the end of scrollable content, whether the call waits for the gesture to settle, or what is returned — meaningful gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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, front-loaded with the action, with the disambiguating detail about direction placed where it is needed. No filler or repetition of schema content.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should cover behavior and return expectations, and it only partly does. It is adequate for invoking the tool but leaves end-of-content behavior and result reporting unstated for a 3-parameter interaction tool.

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 67%; the 'amount' and 'device' parameters are already documented in the schema, but 'direction' has only an enum and no description. The description supplies exactly that missing meaning ('down' reveals content further down), adding genuine value beyond the structured fields.

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 (content) plus the mechanism (swiping from the middle of the screen), and clarifies the ambiguous 'down' case. It implicitly separates itself from the generic sibling 'swipe' via the middle-of-screen gesture, though it never names swipe directly.

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 direction gloss ('down' reveals content further down) tells the agent how to pick a value, which is real usage guidance. However, there is no statement of when to prefer this over swipe, tap_element, or describe_ui, and no preconditions (e.g., content must be scrollable).

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