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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those annotations: it returns step-by-step instructions with screens, buttons, and fields, opens nothing by itself, and requires the cotlet_browser_* tools to perform the actual action.

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 short and front-loads the core behavior. The sentence about Brandfolder's official API is somewhat cryptic and does not clearly earn its place, but overall the text is appropriately sized and easy to scan.

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 output schema and no parameters, the description carries the burden of explaining what the tool returns. It does so by stating that it returns step-by-step instructions and that the actual action happens through cotlet_browser_* tools. The only minor gap is the unclear 'Brandfolder's official API: Yes' statement.

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 has zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to document. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is 4, and the description does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

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 states a specific resource and action: getting an asset in the user's Brandfolder account. It also clarifies that the tool returns step-by-step instructions rather than opening anything itself, which distinguishes it from the browser tools it points to. The name/title 'Get asset' is slightly misleading because the tool does not directly retrieve the asset, but the second sentence resolves that.

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 gives clear context for use from ChatGPT, Claude, or any AI agent and says to follow up with cotlet_browser_* tools in the Brandfolder Cloud Browser. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus siblings like brandfolder_search_assets or cotlet_app_guide, and it provides no exclusions.

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