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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description usefully adds that the call costs nothing and consumes no browser session and that unknown apps still return a general method — real behavioral value beyond the annotations, though it says nothing about response size or latency.

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?

Appropriately short for a two-parameter tool, and the 'call before the first browser step' instruction and free/no-session qualifier are placed early. The opening sentence is a dense run-on list of deliverables that takes a second pass to parse, but nothing is wasted.

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, the description carries the burden of explaining returns, and it enumerates them (browser choice, sign-in link, method, UI map, notes, dedicated tools) plus the unknown-app fallback. Complete enough for an agent to call it correctly; only minor gaps remain around output format and whether a browser must already be open.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters (app, task) are already documented with defaults and meanings in the schema. The description hints that the workspace's browser choice and the app's dedicated tools depend on the app, but adds no syntax, slug format, or behavioral detail beyond the schema baseline.

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?

States precisely what the tool returns: which browser to use for the workspace, the sign-in link, step-by-step method, app screens/menus/actions, notes, and the app's dedicated tools. It is unambiguously a guidance/knowledge tool, clearly separable from the cotlet_browser_* action tools that follow 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?

Gives explicit timing ('Call it before the first browser step in an app') and a scoping rule ('Works for any web app; one outside Cotlet's catalog gets the general method'). 'Free, no browser session' implicitly distinguishes it from cotlet_browser_open, though no sibling is named outright and there is no explicit 'do not call mid-session' caveat.

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