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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior; the description reinforces this by saying it "opens nothing by itself" and only returns instructions. It adds a useful boundary that execution happens through browser tools, though it does not address prerequisites or response details beyond the step-by-step format.

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 core behavioral clarification is present and reasonably front-loaded, but the opening "Copy events" framing is slightly misleading before the correction, and the official API note with a checked date is not necessary for selecting or invoking the tool. The description is not bloated, but parts could be trimmed.

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 zero-parameter, read-only guide tool, it explains the deliverable, confirms no side effects, and points to the browser tools needed for execution. Minor gaps around exact output or prerequisites are acceptable given the tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the input schema has nothing to document and the baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter meaning because no invocation parameters exist.

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 identifies the resource (events in the user's own Skiddle account) and clarifies the actual deliverable: step-by-step instructions rather than performing the copy. It also names the cotlet_browser_* tools as the execution path, though the opening phrase "Copy events" could initially imply the tool performs the mutation.

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 clearly says this tool returns instructions and that the actual copying must be done with cotlet_browser_* tools in the Skiddle Cloud Browser. It does not explicitly compare against cotlet_app_guide or state when not to use this tool, but the operational routing is clear.

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