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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'opens nothing by itself', which removes doubt about side effects. It also adds genuinely new context beyond the annotations: the return payload is a step-by-step screen/button/field walkthrough, and it notes Agile CRM's REST API rate cap per plan.

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 core behavior is stated, but the opening sentence is long and self-correcting, and the trailing API/MCP-server trivia ('checked 22 Oct 2026') is informational filler that does not help an agent select or call the tool. The key fact—returns instructions, performs nothing—should lead.

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 parameters and no output schema, the description must explain what comes back, and it does: a step-by-step guide plus an explicit statement that the tool itself opens nothing. The handoff to cotlet_browser_* tools closes the loop for a zero-parameter guidance tool.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries no semantic burden and the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a no-argument call and adds no misleading parameter expectations.

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 opens with an imperative that sounds like a write action ('Add note in the user's own Agile CRM account'), then clarifies it only returns step-by-step instructions. The resource is named but the operation type is stated ambiguously before being corrected, so an agent skimming the first clause could misread it as an action tool.

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?

It does route the agent: get the steps here, then execute with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the Cloud Browser. However, it gives no when-not guidance (e.g., when to call cotlet_app_guide or a direct browser tool instead) and does not name any sibling alternative explicitly.

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