scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only names the input gesture (mouse wheel) and unit. It does not say which tab is affected when tab_id is null, whether the page must be focused, or whether scrolling is relative or absolute.

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?

A single waste-free sentence, front-loaded with the action and unit. It is appropriately sized but too terse to cover the parameters the tool exposes.

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 3-parameter tool with zero annotation coverage, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description is inadequate: direction and tab targeting are never addressed, so an agent cannot reliably call it.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains only 'amount' (in pixels), leaving the direction enum (up/down/left/right) and tab_id entirely undocumented in both the schema and the description.

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), resource (the page), and mechanism (mouse wheel) with a unit (pixels). It is clearly distinct from all siblings, none of which scroll, but it omits the direction dimension that the tool actually supports.

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 guidance on when to use this versus alternatives (e.g. read_page/get_text to inspect content) or any prerequisite such as needing an active tab. An agent must infer the usage context entirely.

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