chrome_scroll

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that it dispatches real wheel events with momentum-shaped deltas, which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention side effects like focus changes, whether the scroll is smooth or instant, or what happens if the selector is invalid. The description adds some value but leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the core action and mechanism. It is concise and avoids redundancy with the schema. It could be slightly more informative about usage context, but it earns its place as an efficient definition.

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?

Given the tool has 9 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is somewhat thin. It explains the core mechanism but does not cover target selection (uid, selector, targetId, urlIncludes, titleIncludes), the meaning of 'steps', or the 'background' behavior. An agent would need to infer or inspect the schema to understand how to target the scroll. The description is adequate for a simple scroll but incomplete for a tool with this many parameters.

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 78%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds the momentum-shaped delta behavior, which gives meaning to deltaX/deltaY, but it does not explain the 'uid' or 'selector' parameters beyond what the schema provides. The description adds marginal value over the schema but does not fully compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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 clearly states the tool scrolls the page or a specific scrollable element by dispatching real wheel events with momentum-shaped deltas. It uses a specific verb ('scroll'), names the resource ('page or a specific scrollable element'), and distinguishes the mechanism ('real wheel events with momentum-shaped deltas') from other navigation or interaction 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?

The description implies usage for scrolling, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like chrome_evaluate (for programmatic scroll) or chrome_drag (for drag-based scrolling). It does not mention exclusions or prerequisites, such as needing a target tab or element. The context is clear but the guidance is not explicit.

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