browser_scroll

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

The description discloses the two distinct behaviors (element scroll vs window scroll) and the mutual exclusivity constraint. Annotations indicate openWorldHint and non-destructive nature, which aligns with the description. No contradiction.

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 only two sentences, front-loading the key information about the two modes and the constraint. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 scrolling tool, the description covers all necessary information: two modes, parameter constraint, and behavior. No output schema exists, but the return is likely minimal; the description is sufficient for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds the crucial rule of mutual exclusivity (selector OR x+y), which is not evident from the schema alone, providing meaningful guidance.

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 two specific actions: scrolling an element into view using a selector, or scrolling the window to coordinates. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like browser_click and browser_navigate by focusing solely on 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 explicitly states the constraint 'Provide a selector OR x+y, not both,' guiding proper usage. While it doesn't compare to alternative tools, the tool is unique among siblings, so no exclusion is needed.

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