browser_scroll

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behaviors. It mentions scrolling and the visual parameter, but does not clarify if scrolling is smooth, if it handles dynamic content, or what happens when both selector and direction are specified. Lacks full behavioral transparency.

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 concise sentences that front-load the purpose and quickly cover the two usage modes. No redundant or unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description covers the main usage scenarios. However, it could mention what happens with conflicting inputs (e.g., both direction and selector) or edge cases. Without output schema or annotations, a bit more detail on return behavior would improve 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?

Schema covers all four parameters with descriptions. The description repeats the parameter usage but adds no new meaning beyond stating the default pixel value (800) and that visual returns base64 PNG. With 100% schema coverage, the description adds minimal additional value.

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 the tool scrolls the current page and specifies two modes: direction with optional pixel amount, or a selector to scroll element into view. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like browser_navigate or browser_click.

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?

Explains when to use each scrolling mode (direction/amount vs. selector), but does not explicitly warn against using this tool when alternatives like browser_navigate or browser_read are more appropriate. The sibling list provides context but the description itself lacks direct guidance.

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