thunder_scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses a useful trait—human-like easing and reading pauses—but says nothing about direction, whether scrolling is bounded, whether it waits for content to load, or what side effects it has on page state.

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 short sentence with no filler and the key action is front-loaded. It is under-specified rather than verbose, which is a completeness issue, but from a conciseness standpoint it wastes no words.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the description is too thin for reliable invocation. It does not cover return behavior, boundaries, or how the single parameter affects the operation, leaving an agent without enough context to call it correctly.

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% for the single parameter "amount" (default 600), and the description never mentions it. It does not clarify units (pixels? lines? percent), direction, or what the default represents, so the description fails to compensate for the schema 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?

The verb "scroll" is specific, but the description never names the target (page, element, viewport) or scope, and the phrase "human easing and reading pauses" describes manner rather than the resource acted on. It provides no differentiation from siblings such as thunder_human_read or thunder_read, leaving the agent to infer the distinction.

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 gives no indication of when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. An agent must guess whether this is for general page movement, reading assistance, or something else entirely.

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