sleeper_scroll

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not say whether the scroll waits for completion, how sticky/fixed elements behave, whether it is instant or smooth, or what happens if the selector is missing. For a browser action with zero annotation coverage this is a significant gap.

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 phrase with no filler, and the core distinction is front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for its content, though brevity here leans toward under-specification rather than crisp conciseness.

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?

With 4 parameters, no annotations, no output schema and no defaults disclosed, the description omits too much: activation context, wait/settle behavior, and the tab vs profile browser-targeting semantics. An agent cannot call this reliably without guessing.

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 description coverage is only 25% (only 'profile' documented), so the description must compensate. It does add meaning for two of four params ('by pixels' -> y, 'to selector' -> selector), but leaves tab and the y/selector interaction (mutually exclusive?) undefined.

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 the two modes of operation (by pixels or to selector), so an agent knows exactly what it does. It does not differentiate from the sibling sleeper_scroll_until, which is the closest alternative and is not mentioned.

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 use this versus sleeper_scroll_until, nor any prerequisites such as needing a page/tab context first (sleeper_goto/sleeper_tabs). The agent receives no signal about which scroll variant to pick.

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