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

The key disclosure 'opens nothing by itself' is valuable and consistent with readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The note about FieldEdge's API being available only via an onboarding request explains why browser automation is required, which annotations cannot convey. But it doesn't say what the returned guide text looks like or how granular it is beyond 'screens, buttons, fields'.

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 behavioral disclosure ('opens nothing by itself') is buried mid-sentence rather than front-loaded. 'from ChatGPT, Claude or any AI agent' is generic audience boilerplate that earns no place, and the API-access paragraph is verbose relative to its value.

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 guide tool with no output schema, an agent still needs to know what to do with the result (feed the steps into cotlet_browser_*), which is stated. What's missing is any sense of the guide's scope or reliability, and the dangling 'checked 8 Nov 2026' date adds no actionable information.

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 is trivially complete and there is nothing for the description to compensate for. Baseline 4 applies; no parameter claims are made that could mislead.

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 opening sentence says 'List customers in the user's own FieldEdge account', but the second sentence reveals the tool actually 'Returns how to do it in FieldEdge step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself'. The real function (returning a navigation guide, not customer data) is stated, but only after the misleading framing, so an agent skimming the first clause would expect a data list.

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 explicitly hands off execution to 'the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's FieldEdge Cloud Browser', which is genuine routing guidance. However, it never distinguishes itself from the sibling cotlet_app_guide, nor says when to prefer this over other FieldEdge tools such as fieldedge_list_unpaid_invoices.

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