safari_scroll_to

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose whether scrolling is absolute or relative, whether it animates, or what happens when x or y are omitted. The receipt parameter is not mentioned in the description, so its role in targeting a specific tab is omitted from the tool's stated behavior.

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 a single, succinct sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple action tool.

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?

The description covers the core action but lacks context about expected return values or side effects. Given it is a simple scroll action and no output schema exists, the lack of return details is not critical, but the absence of usage guidance makes it less complete in context.

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 schema already provides clear descriptions for x, y, and receipt, including defaults and the receipt's purpose. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema states, so the baseline score for high schema coverage applies.

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 clearly states the verb 'Scroll' and the object 'to a specific position on the page,' implying coordinates. It is somewhat vague compared to sibling tools like safari_scroll (likely relative) and safari_scroll_to_element (targets an element), but the parameters x and y make the intent clear enough.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like safari_scroll or safari_scroll_to_element. The description does not mention that this is for absolute coordinate-based scrolling, nor does it note any conditions for using the receipt parameter.

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