browser_scroll_to_bottom

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses the pausing behavior, stopping condition, safety cap (max_scrolls), and return of a snapshot. No contradictions or missing critical side effects are noted.

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 extremely concise, front-loading the main action. Every sentence adds value: scroll purpose, stopping logic, parameter roles, and return type. No redundant or irrelevant 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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description does not need to elaborate on return details beyond mentioning a snapshot. It covers the stopping condition, parameter explanations, and the lazy loading pause. Could mention edge cases like already at bottom, but overall complete.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaning to max_scrolls and wait_ms, explaining they are safety cap and pause per step. Session_id is not explained, but its purpose is standard in context. Overall, it compensates well for missing schema descriptions.

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 scrolls to the very bottom of the page, with specifics about lazy loading and infinite scroll handling. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_scroll by focusing on exhaustive scrolling to the bottom.

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 pages with lazy content or infinite scroll, and explains the stopping condition. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like browser_scroll, nor does it mention when not to use it.

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