browser_scroll

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

Description only covers scrolling mechanics and parameter behavior. It does not disclose side effects like scrolling smoothness, whether lazy loading triggers, or if the function waits for scroll completion. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, but description provides no extra behavioral context beyond that.

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?

Description is brief (four lines) with a clear main sentence and three bullet points. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 scroll tool, the description covers all parameter modes and their effects. Output schema exists, so return values don't need mention. Missing are edge cases (e.g., invalid selector or coordinates) but overall sufficient for typical use.

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?

All four parameters have full schema descriptions. The tool description adds valuable interplay details beyond the schema: how selector, x/y, and by combine (e.g., 'by=true with x/y to scroll relative'). This clarifies semantics beyond individual parameter docs.

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?

Description clearly states it scrolls the page or an element into view. The verb 'scroll' and resource 'page/element' are specific. No sibling tool targets scrolling, so it's well-distinguished.

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?

Bullet points explain four usage modes: CSS selector for element, absolute coordinates, relative scroll with by=true, and no-argument scroll-to-top. Explicit conditions and exclusions are absent but context is clear without needing alternatives since no sibling overlaps.

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