Scrolls the page to an absolute position using x and y coordinates, with optional smooth scrolling behavior.
Scroll to absolute position on the page
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| x | No | Horizontal position in pixels (default: 0) | |
| y | No | Vertical position in pixels (default: 0) | |
| behavior | No | Scroll behavior (default: auto) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention whether scrolling is instant or animated (beyond the schema's behavior enum), whether it waits for completion, what it returns, or any side effects. Only the core action is stated.
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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple action tool, though brevity comes at the cost of other dimensions.
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 no annotations, no output schema, and sibling tools with overlapping functionality, the description is incomplete. It fails to differentiate from 'scroll' and 'scrollIntoView' and does not disclose behavioral details needed to invoke the tool correctly beyond the schema.
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 100%, so the x, y, and behavior parameters are fully documented in the input schema with defaults. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying that x and y define an absolute position, which the schema already conveys.
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 states a clear verb (scroll) and resource (absolute position on the page), making the tool's basic purpose understandable. However, it does not distinguish this tool from its siblings 'scroll' and 'scrollIntoView', which likely provide similar functionality with different semantics.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'scroll' or 'scrollIntoView'. It simply states what it does without any usage context, exclusions, or conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.