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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety bar is low; the description still adds real value by stating it "opens nothing by itself" and only returns text instructions, which prevents an agent from assuming a side effect occurred. It leaves gaps around prerequisites (auth state, missing app) but the key behavioral trait is disclosed.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words: one says what it returns and what it does not do, and the second names the follow-up behavior. The final line about Printify's official REST API adds useful context for why a browser tool is needed.

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 parameterless, read-only guide tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers what it returns (screens, buttons, fields), that it performs no action, and which siblings to use afterward. A brief note on prerequisites would make it fully complete, but everything needed to call it correctly is present.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 and nothing in the description is needed to clarify inputs. The schema is empty and fully self-describing.

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 restates the tool name ("List orders") and implies the tool returns orders, but the second sentence reveals the actual behavior: it returns step-by-step instructions for performing the listing in Printify. The correction is explicit ("Returns how to do it in Printify step by step (screens, buttons, fields) and opens nothing by itself"), so an agent can figure it out, but the name/verb versus actual output mismatch costs clarity.

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?

There is useful sequencing guidance: call this, "then do it with the cotlet_browser_* tools in the user's Printify Cloud Browser". That tells the agent what to do next. However, there is no guidance on when to prefer this over siblings like cotlet_app_guide, printify_list_products, or when a direct API path exists, and no stated prerequisites (signed-in Cloud Browser session, shop selection).

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