random_scroll

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions lazy-load triggering but does not explain side effects, the meaning of 'smart' or 'random' direction, what happens with amount=0, or whether scrolling may trigger network requests or wait for content. This is under-disclosed for an interaction 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the core action and key options before the schema details are needed.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is too short to fully equip an agent. It lacks guidance on direction semantics, default behavior, when to invoke this tool, and what observable effects or return value to expect.

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 50%, so the description should compensate. It restates that direction, amount, and lazy-loading are configurable, but adds no new meaning beyond the parameter names and existing schema descriptions. It omits the 'smooth' parameter entirely and does not clarify the ambiguous 'smart' direction value.

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 names a specific verb ('Scroll'), a specific resource ('the page'), and the configurable aspects (direction, amount, lazy-load triggering). Among the sibling tools, none other is a scrolling tool, so this is clearly differentiated.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention conditions such as 'use when content is below the fold' or 'use for lazy-loaded pages', nor does it suggest a sibling tool for other cases.

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