computer_scroll

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It only states the action and does not disclose whether the cursor moves to x/y, what happens when scroll_x/scroll_y are both zero, or any side effects of the scroll operation.

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 a single, short sentence with no filler or repetition. It is appropriately front-loaded, though it is so terse that it sacrifices useful behavioral and usage context.

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 is not complete enough for a tool with four parameters and no annotations. It omits how x/y and scroll_x/scroll_y interact, whether the pointer is moved to the position, and how this differs from sibling mouse tools. The output schema is present, so return values do not need explanation, but behavioral context is still missing.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, and each parameter already has a clear description (X coordinate, Y coordinate, horizontal scroll amount, vertical scroll amount). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a clear verb ('scroll') and a target ('the specified position'), and the action is distinct from sibling tools like move, click, or drag. However, it does not differentiate from siblings or clarify what 'position' means beyond the schema.

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 tool versus alternatives such as computer_move or computer_mouse_down. No context, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria are provided, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate scenario.

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