mouse_scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden and delivers only direction polarity. It does not say where the scroll is delivered (current pointer position), whether focus matters, or what magnitude a "click" represents — critical behavioral facts for an input-simulation 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?

A single short sentence, front-loaded with the action and immediately followed by the parameter convention. No filler whatsoever.

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 one-parameter input-simulation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum state that scrolling applies at the current cursor location and how it relates to mouse_hscroll and mouse_move_to. Both are absent, leaving an agent unable to predict the effect of a call.

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 0%, so the description must supply meaning, and it does decode the sign of `clicks` (positive up, negative down) — genuinely additive over an undescribed integer. It stops short of explaining magnitude, i.e. how far one click scrolls relative to the -120..120 bounds.

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 and resource ("Scroll the wheel"), which is far more informative than the bare name. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling mouse_hscroll, so an agent must infer that this tool is the vertical axis.

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, when-not-to-use, or alternative is named. Siblings mouse_hscroll (horizontal) and mouse_move_to (positioning before scrolling) are never referenced, and no preconditions are stated.

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