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

The description resolves a serious naming ambiguity: despite being called 'reschedule', it 'opens nothing by itself' and only returns guidance, which is fully consistent with readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. It also discloses why browser automation follows (MassageBook publishes no API, webhooks or Zapier app), which is context the annotations cannot carry.

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?

Front-loads what the tool does and what it returns, then the handoff token cotlet_browser_*. The closing note on MassageBook's API/webhook/Zapier exports is relevant justification for the browser step but sits slightly apart from the core instruction.

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, yet the description still states the return shape (step-by-step screens, buttons, fields) and the follow-up action, so an agent knows what to expect. It omits prerequisites such as needing an active Cloud Browser session and does not say how the appointment to reschedule is identified.

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 generic guidance ('screens, buttons, fields') rather than appointment-specific output, though it never explicitly says the caller must supply appointment details to the browser tools instead.

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 ('Reschedule appointment in ... MassageBook account') and immediately clarifies the critical twist that it returns step-by-step instructions rather than performing the action. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling massagebook_book_appointment, so an agent must infer the boundary from the verb alone.

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?

Gives a clear workflow: call this first for the instructions, then execute with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the MassageBook Cloud Browser. There is no explicit when-not guidance or named alternative such as book_appointment for net-new bookings, which keeps it below a 5.

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