swipe

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'no index support due to reliability', which adds some context about limitations, but fails to describe critical behaviors like whether this is a read-only or mutating operation, what happens on success/failure, or any performance/rate-limit considerations for a scrolling tool.

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 appropriately concise with a single sentence that communicates the core functionality and a key limitation. It's front-loaded with the main purpose, though it could be slightly more structured by separating the capability statement from the limitation.

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 scrolling tool with 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how errors are handled, or provide context about scrolling behavior differences across platforms. The 'no index support' note is helpful but doesn't compensate for other missing behavioral information.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema - it mentions direction and speed but doesn't explain their interaction or provide usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 purpose as a 'Unified scroll command' that supports direction and speed, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'scroll' by mentioning 'no index support due to reliability', though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'swipeOnElement' or 'swipeOnScreen'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'scroll', 'swipeOnElement', or 'swipeOnScreen'. It mentions 'no index support' as a limitation but doesn't explain when this tool is preferred or when other tools might be better suited.

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