page_scroll_top

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action (get scroll position) but does not disclose return format, whether it returns only scrollTop or also scrollLeft, or any error conditions. For a simple read operation this is acceptable but not rich.

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 short sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose. There is no redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple getter with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain the meaning of page_id, the return value, or any prerequisites. While the name clarifies the return, the description alone leaves significant gaps for a new agent.

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?

The schema defines one parameter page_id with only a type and no description. The tool description does not mention page_id or its meaning at all. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent to infer page_id is the target page identifier.

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 '获取页面滚动位置（scrollTop）' clearly states a specific verb+resource: getting the page's scrollTop value. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like page_scroll_to (which sets scroll position) and element_scroll_to (which targets elements).

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives, but the purpose implies using it to read the page's current scroll position. There is no mention of exclusions or alternative tools, so it relies on the name and sibling context for usage.

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