chrome_scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that the snapshot_id is ephemeral and must come from the immediately preceding chrome_read, and that it targets a single node, but it says nothing about side effects, what happens on a stale snapshot, or the return value.

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 tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and parameter semantics appended; no filler. Slightly dense but every clause earns its place.

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?

No output schema or annotations exist, so the description should do more. It covers the snapshot dependency and node targeting adequately but omits return behavior and failure modes, leaving an agent with gaps for a 4-required-param mutation-like tool.

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 coverage is 50%, with node_id and snapshot_id already documented in the schema. The description restates the direction enum (up/down/left/right) and amount enum (line/half_page/page) in prose, adding little beyond the self-descriptive enums, so it neither compensates for nor worsens the coverage gap.

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) and resource (one exact scroll-capable node, including root), and the clause 'no coordinates' implicitly separates it from a coordinate-based scroll sibling. An agent can tell what it does, though it never names the alternative tool explicitly.

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?

The prerequisite 'from the immediately preceding chrome_read snapshot' implies when to use it, and 'no coordinates' implies when to prefer a semantic scroll. However, there is no explicit when/when-not or named alternative, so usage is only implied.

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