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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower; the description still adds meaningful context beyond them by stating 'Free, no browser session' – telling the agent this call costs nothing and does not open or consume a Cloud Browser session. It does not describe the shape of the returned guidance, which is the main remaining gap.

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?

One front-loaded sentence states the purpose, followed by the when-to-call rule. The middle enumeration is dense but each element names a distinct piece of returned content; no filler sentences.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must convey what the call yields – and it enumerates the guidance contents (browser choice, sign-in link, method, screen/menu/action map, notes, dedicated tools). Combined with the timing rule and the no-session/no-cost note, an agent has everything needed to decide to call it.

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% with both parameters documented (app name/slug with a Printful default, and task in the user's words), so the schema carries the semantics. The description implies the app scoping but adds no format, default, or wording guidance beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb+resource: it returns guidance for operating an app through Cotlet's browser tools (browser choice, sign-in link, step-by-step method, screens/menus/actions, notes, dedicated tools). It implicitly distinguishes itself from the cotlet_browser_* siblings by being a guide rather than an action, though it never explicitly says 'this is not a browser action tool'.

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?

Explicit timing rule: 'Call it before the first browser step in an app.' It also states coverage boundaries ('Works for any web app; one outside Cotlet's catalog gets the general method'), so the agent knows the tool still applies when the app is unknown.

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