scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses almost nothing behavioral: whether scrolling waits for completion, how amounts are interpreted, what load_more does (trigger infinite scroll? loop?), or how max_scrolls bounds it. The mode list describes surface capability, not runtime traits.

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 dense parenthetical with zero filler, and the core action is front-loaded in 'unified scrolling'. It is terse to the point of being a capability dump, but every token carries 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 9-parameter, 0-required, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool with nested objects, this description is far too thin. Key behaviors and parameter interactions (by vs position, amount, max_scrolls) are left for the agent to guess.

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 only 33% across 9 parameters, so the description must compensate, and it does partially: coordinates maps to by/position, relative to offsets, text, direction, and loading more map to their params. However the crucial distinction between 'by' and 'position', the meaning of 'amount', and max_scrolls semantics remain undocumented in both places.

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 verb 'scrolling' plus 'unified' clearly identify the action, and the enumerated modes (top/bottom/element/text/coordinates/relative/direction/loading more) scope its capability set. It is distinguishable from siblings like mouse/hover/navigate, though it never names an alternative 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 description lists what modes exist but gives no guidance on when to pick scroll over alternatives (e.g., mouse, hover, navigate, wait_for) or in what order to combine options. The 'loading more' hint implies an intent but does not state conditions.

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