Scroll

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond the fact that scrolling happens. It does not disclose that scroll input may trigger events, change visible content, or be affected by strategy/app_ref, and it does not contradict the annotations.

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 padding and the verb is front-loaded. It loses some clarity due to the cryptic 'bound' adjective, but otherwise it is appropriately concise.

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 tool with six parameters, no output schema, and destructive annotations, this description is too thin. It omits important practical context such as what a scroll amount means, how coordinates relate to frames, and what happens after the action, leaving the agent to infer behavior from the schema alone.

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?

The schema already documents most parameters, but the description adds almost no semantic value beyond restating the target kind. It does not clarify 'bound element', 'page-like scroll amount', how app_ref is resolved, or the effects of strategy/return_state, so it only partially compensates for the 67% schema coverage.

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 names a specific verb ('Scroll') and a resource ('a bound element or frame coordinate'), which aligns with the target union of element or coordinate. It is distinguishable from siblings like click or drag, though the word 'bound' is ambiguous and adds some confusion.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as left_click_drag, key, or mouse_move. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or conditions stated; usage is only implied by the tool name.

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