preview_scroll

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It helpfully states the execution environment (localhost only) and includes a prompt-injection warning that page content is data, not instructions. It says nothing about how far each call scrolls, whether it waits for lazy-loaded content, or what the call returns, so the behavioral picture remains incomplete for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

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?

Three short sentences, with the core action front-loaded before the environment constraints and the safety note. No filler, no repetition.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the environment and injection caveats are useful. The description still leaves an agent unsure what happens after scrolling, such as whether the viewport moves a fixed amount or whether a follow-up inspection tool is needed.

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?

The single parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. 'Up or down' merely restates the enum values and the default is only visible in the schema. It adds no meaning about magnitude, units, or effect.

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 gives a specific verb and resource: 'Scroll the page in BitPull's preview up or down.' It is easy to distinguish from the surrounding preview tools (click, type, look, screenshot). It does not explicitly contrast itself with those siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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 explains where scrolling is valid (localhost sites, either the BitPull app preview under Projects or the system browser fallback). It never says when to scroll rather than take another action, such as using preview_look or preview_screenshot to inspect the new viewport. Usage is therefore implied, not explicit.

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