scroll

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

The description explains dy semantics (negative scrolls down, positive scrolls up), which adds value beyond the schema. However, it does not disclose other behaviors like the default screenshot or dx handling. Given no annotations, the description carries the full burden but is incomplete.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, no wasted words. It efficiently communicates the essential 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 simple scroll action, the description covers the core (location and vertical direction) but leaves dx and screenshot semantics unspecified. It does not mention return value, but no output schema exists, so that is not strictly required. Still, the screenshot default behavior should be disclosed for full completeness.

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 description explicitly explains dy, and x,y are self-evident from the phrase 'at (x,y)'. However, dx and screenshot parameters are not described, and with 0% schema coverage, the description only partially compensates. The lack of explanation for screenshot (default true) could lead to unexpected behavior.

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 ('Scroll'), a target ('under the pointer at (x, y)'), and a clear action. It is distinct from sibling tools like click, move, and drag, even without explicit comparison, because the scroll action is unambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like drag or key. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or situational hints. The description only explains parameter semantics, not usage context.

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