zerodom_scroll

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the real wheel event mechanism, which is a key behavioral nuance affecting which container is scrolled, and notes that it returns newly visible content. It does not cover edge cases like scroll failure or bounds, but for a scroll tool this is reasonably transparent.

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 concise and well-structured: one sentence for purpose, one for parameters, and one for the mechanism. Every sentence earns its place with no filler or repetition.

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?

An output schema exists (though not shown), so return format is presumably covered there. The description explains the scroll behavior and what is returned, which is adequate for a scroll tool. It could mention edge cases (e.g., no scrollable area) but that is minor given the complexity.

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?

The schema has 0% parameter description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains direction values ('up' or 'down') and gives a practical hint for amount ('roughly one screenful is 800'), adding meaning beyond the schema's bare defaults.

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 tool's purpose: 'Scroll the page and return what's newly visible.' It names a specific verb (scroll) and resource (page), and explains the unique mechanism of dispatching a real wheel event at the viewport center, which distinguishes it from generic scrolling and other tools like zerodom_eval_js.

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 explains how the tool behaves (scrolls whatever container is under the cursor) but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. It contrasts with window.scrollBy, implying a use case, but lacks an explicit 'use this when...' or 'instead of...' statement. No direct alternatives are mentioned.

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