Scroll To

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose meaningful behavior: the coordinate-drag mode, the scroll-until-visible mode, and that it returns the element's 'mark'. It omits direction defaults, the roles of duration_ms/max_scrolls/device, and failure behavior, leaving notable gaps for a mutation-style interaction tool.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with 'Two modes' and no wasted words. Each clause maps directly to a distinct invocation path.

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?

The existence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, and the description usefully flags the returned mark. However, for a nine-parameter tool with zero schema coverage and no annotations, the description leaves several parameters and failure/timing behavior unexplained, so it is only minimally complete.

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%, so the description must compensate. It gives meaning to x1/y1/x2/y2, text, and direction, but says nothing about device, duration_ms, or max_scrolls, leaving a third of the nine parameters undocumented in both places.

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 clear verb+resource (scroll) and enumerates two distinct operating modes with their triggering parameters, which lets an agent tell it apart from a plain scroll. It does not, however, differentiate itself from near-neighbors like scroll_until or swipe, so sibling disambiguation is incomplete.

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?

It implicitly tells you when each mode applies (coordinates vs. text), which is useful routing guidance. But it never names alternatives such as scroll_until, scroll_down, or swipe, nor states when-not to use this tool, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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