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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that the call is free and opens no browser session, and that unknown apps fall back to a general method.

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 description is compact and front-loads the purpose before adding usage conditions. The colon-separated list of provided guidance is dense but purposeful, with no obvious 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?

For a low-complexity, read-only guidance tool with fully described parameters and no output schema, the definition covers what the tool returns, when to call it, and its session/cost behavior. It could be slightly more explicit about the response format, but nothing essential 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both optional parameters, including the default app and the task wording. The description adds only the broad scope that any web app is supported and unknown apps get the general method, without elaborating parameter formats.

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 clearly states that this tool provides app-specific working guidance: browser choice, sign-in link, step-by-step method, screens, menus, actions, notes, and dedicated tools. It distinguishes itself from the browser action siblings by framing the output as preparatory guidance rather than a browser operation.

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 says to call it before the first browser step in an app and notes that apps outside Cotlet's catalog still receive the general method. It does not name when not to use it or point to specific alternative tools, but the trigger condition is clear.

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