browser_scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and falls short: it does not state what happens when tabId is omitted, what the default scroll amount or direction is, whether scrolling is smooth or instant, or whether the tab must be focused first. 'Active or specified tab' is the only behavioral hint.

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 short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness borders on under-specification rather than tightness.

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 simple three-parameter action tool with no output schema and no required parameters, the description is minimally adequate but omits defaults for the optional amount/direction/tabId, which an agent needs to call it predictably.

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 all three parameters are already documented in the schema; the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no format, default, or unit detail beyond what the schema states.

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 ('scrolls') and resource ('the active or specified tab') with the axis of motion ('up or down'). No sibling performs scrolling, so differentiation is implicit; only the lack of explicit scope detail (viewport vs. page) keeps it from a 5.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and never references alternatives (e.g., browser_evaluate with scrollIntoView). An agent must infer entirely that this is the tool for viewport movement.

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