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

Adds genuinely useful behavior beyond the annotations: it explicitly states the tool opens nothing by itself and instead returns screens, buttons, and fields to follow. This is consistent with readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The trailing fragment "CapCut's official API: Partly" is cryptic and adds confusion rather than clarity.

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 purpose is front-loaded, but the middle sentence is overloaded with a parenthetical list and a semicolon-joined clause, and the closing "CapCut's official API: Partly" is an unearned fragment that costs clarity. Trimming that fragment and splitting the run-on would make it noticeably stronger.

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 zero-parameter, read-only lookup tool with no output schema, the description covers what comes back (step-by-step screens/buttons/fields) and what to do next (browser tools). It omits any note on prerequisites or failure modes, but nothing critical to correct invocation is 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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline applies. The description does not introduce any phantom inputs, which keeps expectations accurate.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (search CapCut templates) and immediately clarifies the actual behavior: it returns a step-by-step guide rather than performing the search. This distinguishes it from the cotlet_browser_* tools that do the real work, though leading with "Search templates" before the correction introduces a brief misimpression.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to cotlet_browser_* tools in the CapCut Cloud Browser as the follow-up action, which is useful context. However, it gives no when-not-to-use guidance, no conditions (e.g., whether the user must be logged in), and does not name which sibling to prefer when the agent already knows how to search.

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