filmora_scroll

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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description adds that scrolling operates in screenshot pixel space tied to an observation, but it does not explain what state gets altered, whether the change is reversible, or any side effects.

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?

Two short sentences, both front-loaded with the essential action and the direction convention. No filler, no repetition of the tool name, every clause carries information.

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 medium-complexity UI automation tool with no output schema and zero schema descriptions, the essentials (what it does, tick direction, pixel coordinate frame) are present. However, the roles of horizontal, modifiers, and observation_id are not derivable, leaving gaps an agent must guess at.

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% across 6 parameters, so the description must compensate. It does define 'ticks' (positive up/right, negative down/left) and gives units for x/y ('screenshot pixels'), but leaves modifiers, horizontal, and observation_id entirely unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb ('scroll') plus resource ('a pane') and the coordinate reference frame ('screenshot pixels'), which clearly separates it from pointer siblings like filmora_click and filmora_drag. It stops short of naming any sibling or explaining how it differs from filmora_drag/zoom interactions.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no alternatives. The only conditional information given is the direction convention for ticks, which is parameter semantics rather than tool-selection guidance.

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