scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Scroll the page.' only states the core action and provides no detail about whether scrolling is relative, how the 'amount' is interpreted, whether it works on nested scroll containers, or what side effects occur.

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 brief and front-loaded, which is good for scanning. However, it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete; a single sentence that merely restates the tool name doesn't earn its place when two parameters and a sibling alternative need clarification.

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 two parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks parameter semantics, usage context, and any differentiation from related tools, leaving an agent to infer how to call it correctly.

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, but it does not mention the 'amount' or 'direction' parameters at all. The schema's enum and defaults are self-explanatory, yet the meaning of 'amount' (pixels? percentage? steps) is left entirely undefined.

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 clear action and resource: 'Scroll the page.' It is unambiguous about what the tool does at a basic level. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'scroll_to', so the agent cannot tell whether this is free scrolling versus scrolling to 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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool versus 'scroll_to', 'set_viewport_size', or other scrolling-related siblings, and it gives no context about typical scenarios where a relative scroll is preferred.

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