browser_scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose a side effect (triggering more content to load) and that it acts on the background browser rather than the visible screen. It does not say how far it scrolls per call, whether it waits for the load to settle, or what happens if no browser session is active.

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?

One sentence, zero filler, with the action front-loaded and the useful caveat in a compact parenthetical.

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 an unannotated browser-mutation tool with no output schema, the definition covers what it does and one behavioral consequence, but leaves open scroll granularity, whether new content is returned or must be re-read via `browser_read`, and error conditions.

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 0%, but the single parameter is a two-value enum (down/up) whose meaning is self-evident. The description mentions neither `direction` nor scroll distance, so it adds nothing beyond the schema — however little is needed here.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("scroll the page in the background browser") and scopes it to the browser rather than the foreground screen, which implicitly separates it from the generic `scroll`/`swipe` siblings. It does not name those siblings outright, so differentiation is inferable rather than explicit.

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 parenthetical "(loads more on endless pages)" hints at the trigger condition — use it to pull in lazily loaded content — but there is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative for ordinary page scrolling.

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