chrome_scroll

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic action without disclosing any behavioral traits such as side effects, error handling, smoothness, or whether it modifies the DOM. It also doesn't mention what happens when a selector is invalid or matches multiple elements.

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 a single, concise sentence that gets straight to the point. Every word adds value, and it is properly front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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 tool with four optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, a one-line description is inadequate. It doesn't explain the tool's context (e.g., which tab is scrolled), return behavior, or edge cases. The description is too minimal to fully guide correct invocation.

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 already includes comprehensive descriptions for all four parameters, covering 100% of them. The tool description adds no parameter information, but the schema does the heavy lifting. Since coverage is high, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action as 'Scroll' and identifies the resource as 'the page or a specific element.' It uses a specific verb and resource pair, making it clear what the tool does. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like scroll-to-element or navigation, so it doesn't fully distinguish itself, but the verb is unique enough to be clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites like having an active browser connection, or when scrolling is preferable to using navigation commands or pressing keys. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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