Scroll To

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the core looping behavior ('scroll until ... visible') and the return value, but it does not explain what happens if the element is never found within max_scrolls or that the viewport is being changed. The main behavior is clear enough for a simple scroll action.

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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. Every part contributes to understanding what the tool does and what it returns.

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?

The description, schema, and output schema together cover the core invocation: target text, defaults for direction/max_scrolls, and the return value. However, the behavior when the element is not found within the scroll limit is not addressed, and without annotations that is a meaningful gap for an action 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add meaning for 'text' by defining it as a substring of an element's label, but it leaves 'device', 'direction', and 'max_scrolls' without any semantic explanation beyond their names and defaults. Since direction is an unconstrained string, the agent could mis-invoke the tool without knowing the intended values.

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 states a specific verb ('Scroll'), a targeted condition ('until an element whose label contains text is visible'), and the return value ('returns its mark'). This clearly distinguishes it from fixed-direction sibling tools like scroll_down/scroll_up, which do not target a specific element.

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 usage is implied: use this tool when you need to scroll until a labeled element appears. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives like scroll_down/swipe, and with many scrolling siblings some routing guidance would be valuable.

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