scroll

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by differentiating the two scroll modes and mentioning conditions like 'network idle' and 'infinite scroll.' However, it does not disclose potential side effects such as triggering lazy loading or the impact of parameters like settle_ms and step_px. Annotations are minimal, so the description carries some burden but is not fully transparent.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the key information about the two actions. The redundant 'Scroll.' at the start is minor. It is well-structured for quick reading, though it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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 complexity (12 parameters, no output schema), the description provides a minimal overview of the two main modes but lacks details on how to use parameters like 'selector', 'offset_y', 'step_px', etc. It is enough for basic understanding but incomplete for advanced usage. The schema descriptions help, but the tool description could be more comprehensive.

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 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description provides a high-level overview of the 'action' and 'until' parameters, but does not add significant meaning to other parameters like 'x', 'y', 'selector', or 'offset_y'. It clarifies the purpose of the two modes, which is useful, but overall adds limited value beyond the schema.

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 description clearly states the tool scrolls the page and defines the two distinct actions ('to' and 'until') with specific behaviors. However, it could be more explicit about the overall function (e.g., 'Scroll the current page') rather than just 'Scroll.' Distinguishes between modes but not from sibling tools, which are mostly unrelated.

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 explains when to use each action: 'to' for one-time scroll to element/coordinates, 'until' for repeated scrolling until a condition. This provides clear context but does not include explicit when-not or alternatives, though none are obviously needed for a scroll tool.

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