safari_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. It does not disclose side effects, prerequisites (e.g., page must be loaded), or behavior such as whether negative values scroll up/left. The description only repeats what the schema already conveys.

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 efficient with one sentence, but it could be slightly improved by hinting at the optional parameters (e.g., 'on the active or specified tab'). Still, no wasted words.

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 simple tool with 5 optional parameters and full schema coverage, the description is adequate but minimal. It doesn't add context about scroll direction or tab behavior, but the schema fills the gaps. The tool's simplicity keeps it from being incomplete.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates the two modes already described by the 'absolute' parameter.

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 tool scrolls the page, using either delta (x/y pixels) or absolute positioning. It directly addresses the action 'scroll' on a 'page', and this distinguishes it from sibling tools like safari_navigate, safari_click, etc.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., using safari_navigate to go to a new URL). The agent must infer usage context from sibling names alone.

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