Scroll Page or Element

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

The description goes beyond annotations by stating scroll listeners can trigger external requests, analytics, and dynamic content loading. This adds valuable context about side effects, which is not covered by the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false).

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 three concise sentences, each earning its place: purpose and use cases, preconditions and next steps, and sensitivity. Front-loaded with key information, no wasted words.

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 description covers purpose, use cases, and behavioral traits adequately but lacks parameter details. Given the tool has 4 parameters and no schema descriptions, the description is incomplete for proper parameter usage.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain parameters but only mentions selector in passing. It does not define deltaX, deltaY, or timeoutMs, leaving meaning ambiguous. Some compensation for selector, but insufficient overall.

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 scrolls a page or element, and lists specific use cases like lazy loading, infinite scroll, sticky layout, viewport-dependent behavior, and off-screen targets. It distinguishes from sibling tools like clicks and hovers.

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 explains when to use (e.g., lazy loading, infinite scroll) and provides preconditions (active page required, selector only for specific regions) and next steps (wait for activity or inspect changes). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or directly contrast with alternative tools.

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