zen_scroll

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the parameters but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether scrolling is smooth or instant, how boundaries are handled, or if there are any side effects. Minimal behavioral insight is given beyond basic functionality.

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: a one-line headline followed by a straightforward argument list. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 simple tool (3 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the basic inputs and action. However, it does not describe the return value, error conditions, or whether the scroll is smooth, which leaves some gaps for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining that direction is one of 'up','down','left','right', amount is in pixels, and tab_id is optional. This provides necessary context beyond the bare schema. However, it lacks constraints like min/max for amount.

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 'Scroll the page' and lists the parameters, making it evident that it scrolls the page in a direction by a given amount. It is distinct from sibling tools like zen_navigate or zen_forward, though not explicitly differentiated.

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 (e.g., zen_click to scroll via scroll wheel simulation, or zen_focus to bring an element into view). It simply states what it does without context on applicable scenarios.

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