scroll

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

The description adds useful behavioral detail by explaining that 'up'/'down' are relative to `amount` and that 'top'/'bottom' do not use `amount`. However, with no annotations available, the description does not disclose whether scrolling applies to the main viewport or a focused scrollable container, nor what happens at page boundaries.

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 extremely compact and well-structured, starting with the core purpose and followed by a clear Args section. Every sentence earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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?

The tool is simple, both parameters are thoroughly described, and an output schema exists so return values need not be explained. The only minor gaps are the lack of explicit units for `amount` and whether scrolling targets the page viewport or a focused scrollable element.

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 description fully compensates for zero schema description coverage. It explains every direction value and clarifies the relationship between direction and amount, including that `amount` only matters for 'up'/'down'. This goes well beyond the raw enum and default values in the schema.

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's action and resource: 'Scroll the page.' It is immediately distinguishable from all sibling tools, none of which overlap with this scrolling behavior. The verb and target are specific and unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and the sentence 'Scroll the page,' but there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. Since no sibling scrolls, this is not a major issue, but the guidance is still mostly implicit.

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