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

With readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true already declared, the description adds the key behavioral fact that the tool opens nothing and only returns text, so the agent knows it has no side effects. It also volunteers that Dext has no public API or official MCP server, which explains why a browser-based path is required.

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 guidance is front-loaded and short, but the closing claim about Dext's official API status, including the odd parenthetical "(checked 14 Oct 2026)", is not needed in order to call the tool and adds noise. The promotional "from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent" phrasing is also filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description has to state what comes back, and it does: step-by-step screens, buttons and fields. With a zero-parameter, read-only tool this is nearly sufficient; only the relationship to cotlet_app_guide is left implicit.

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 baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed, and there is nothing in the schema left unexplained.

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 makes clear that this tool does not publish anything itself but returns step-by-step instructions for publishing to the ledger in Dext ("Returns how to do it in Dext step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself"). That resolves the mismatch between the action-oriented name and the guidance-only behavior, though an agent skimming only the name could still misread it.

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 an explicit follow-up path: after getting the steps, execute them with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Dext Cloud Browser. It does not say when to prefer this over cotlet_app_guide, which is the closest sibling and could plausibly also return app instructions.

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