lightweight_scroll

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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that scrolling is performed via JavaScript and that the new scroll position is returned, providing useful context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 short sentences with no wasted words. Front-loads the action and clearly states the return value. Highly concise.

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?

While the description covers the core action and return value, it does not specify the return structure or handle edge cases (e.g., invalid selector). With 7 parameters and no output schema, more detail would improve completeness.

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?

All parameters have descriptions in the input schema (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema provides for the parameters.

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 ('Scroll page via JS') and its return value ('Returns new scroll position'). It is specific, uses a verb+resource structure, and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'javascript_tool' or 'navigate' by focusing on lightweight scrolling.

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 implies the tool is for scrolling a page, but provides no guidance on when to use it over alternatives like 'javascript_tool' or 'act'. No when-not-to-use or explicit context is given.

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