console_scroll

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

Annotations mark this as non-idempotent and destructive, but the description gives no explanation of what side effects make it destructive or what state it alters. It adds useful scroll-direction semantics for delta but omits prerequisites such as an active console/VM session.

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 compact sentences with the action front-loaded and no wasted words. The hedge 'normally' slightly weakens precision but the structure is efficient.

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 destructive, non-idempotent console mutation with an output schema, the description is too thin. It does not cover required session state, the effect of delta magnitude, or why the operation is considered destructive.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for both parameters. It explains that delta is relative and that positive values normally scroll up, but vm_name is entirely unexplained and no units or magnitude guidance are provided.

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 specific verb and resource: applying a relative synthetic-mouse wheel delta. It is distinct from siblings like console_mouse_move and console_click, though it never states that the target is a VM console session.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this versus console_mouse_move, console_click, or console_mouse_buttons. The intended scrolling use is only implied by 'wheel delta'; no preconditions or exclusions are given.

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