scout_scroll

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 correctly states that the tool scrolls the page or an element, but it does not mention any side effects (e.g., non-destructive nature), error handling (e.g., invalid element_id), or scrolling behavior (e.g., smooth vs instant). For a simple scroll action, this is adequate but could be improved.

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 concise with two sentences, no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and quickly provides the key differentiation with element_id.

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 low complexity (3 parameters, simple action), the description covers the action and parameter usage well. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., success status or page state), which is a minor gap.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that element_id is used to scroll within a container instead of the whole page, which clarifies its role beyond the schema description. Direction and pixels are sufficiently explained in the schema.

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 verb 'scroll' and the resource ('page or a specific element'). It distinguishes itself by specifying when to use element_id for scrolling within containers, which differentiates it from other sibling tools.

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 clear context on when to scroll the whole page versus a specific element using element_id. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or list alternative tools, but given there is no other scroll tool among siblings, the guidance is sufficient.

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