Browser Scroll

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether the scroll is smooth or instant, what happens when both direction and amount_px are supplied, whether it affects page state, or any side effects. This leaves important behavioral ambiguity for an agent.

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 two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action ('Scroll the page') and then succinctly lists the key options. Every word contributes to understanding.

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 four parameters, no annotations, and no in-schema parameter descriptions, this description is too sparse. It does not explain the tab/session parameters, the semantics of combining direction with amount_px, or any return behavior, even though an output schema exists. An agent would need to infer or experiment to use 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain all parameters. It only addresses direction (listing the allowed values) and amount_px (as 'Optional pixel amount'), but completely ignores the tab and session parameters. The interaction between direction and amount_px is also not clarified, leaving the agent without full parameter understanding.

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 specific verb and resource ('Scroll the page') and clarifies the scope by listing the four directional variants (down, up, top, bottom) plus an optional pixel amount. No sibling tool performs scrolling, so this is easily distinguishable.

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?

There is no explanation of when to use this tool versus other browser tools, no prerequisites, and no mention of situations where it should not be used. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer use cases from the name and sibling context.

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