scroll

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it only discloses that amount defaults to 0.4. It says nothing about whether scrolling waits for rendering, what settle/wait_change/stable_for do together, or whether the call blocks until the timeout.

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?

A single tight sentence with the core behavior and the two most-used parameter semantics front-loaded. Nothing is padded, though the parenthetical format slightly buries the default value.

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 six-parameter, annotation-free interaction tool with no output schema, the description leaves the timing/settling parameters entirely unexplained, which is exactly the complexity an agent needs help with.

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 17%, so the description must compensate; it does explain direction's enum values and amount's units (fraction of screen) and default. However, four of six parameters (timeout, stable_for, wait_change, and the interaction of settle) remain undocumented in both schema and description.

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 specific verb (scroll) and resource (the page) plus the axis vocabulary, so the action is unmistakable. It does not distinguish itself from near-siblings like swipe or scroll_into_view, which also move the viewport.

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 guidance on when to scroll versus swipe or scroll_into_view, and no mention of preconditions such as needing a loaded page. The agent must infer tool selection from names alone.

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