scrollMoves the displayed view vertically and horizontally at a specified position or current pointer, enabling precise navigation of GUI content within nested displays.
Scrolls vertically (dy) and horizontally (dx) at the given position or the current pointer.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| x | No | ||
| y | No | ||
| dx | No | ||
| dy | No | ||
| id | No | Display id from display_open. Optional when exactly one display is open. | |
| window_id | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It mentions vertical and horizontal scrolling and position versus current pointer, but omits whether focus/display/window is required, what happens without an active pointer, units of dx/dy, and whether scrolling is immediate or animated.
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 front-loaded sentence with no redundant or filler content. It states the action and axes efficiently, though its brevity contributes to the missing context noted elsewhere.
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?
With six parameters, no annotations, no output schema, and low schema description coverage, the description is not complete enough for reliable invocation. It omits window/display targeting, coordinate semantics, scroll units, and prerequisites that an agent needs to call this tool 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 only 17%, with only 'id' documented in the schema. The description adds meaning for dx/dy as horizontal/vertical scroll amounts and implies x/y are coordinates, but it does not explain window_id, units, defaults, or the interaction between position and pointer.
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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Scrolls vertically (dy) and horizontally (dx)'. It also clarifies the scroll target context ('at the given position or the current pointer'), though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling pointer/window tools.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like pointer_move, click, or focus, nor any prerequisites such as whether a display or window must be active. The only usage hint is implicit: scrolling can occur at a given position or the current pointer.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.