How to annotate studies properly?

Recently I’ve annotated an endgame study (The Saavedra Position), which I seemed to have annotated wrong. Later, a kind user corrected me that nothing Black plays in that position can be marked as a blunder since all of Black’s defenses are gone. Does anybody have any other things that endgame analyzer and annotator newbies might overlook?

(P.S. Sorry if I put this in the wrong section.)

Not entirely sure what you are seeking, but for protocol on annotations, haveyou read about the “Nunn Convention”, created by GM John Nunn, used the the book “Secrets of Pawn Endings” by Muller and Lamprecht?

And, careful use of engine before posting have helped me minimize analytical errors and typos.

I'll give you a good link if I find one. The Nunn annotation is on Wikipedia but Nunn is a multi-colored animal. He is game GM, WC composition solver and general endgame expert. His annotation is about games and endgames but not endgame compositions. There is a paragraph on chess composition which is very short but correct but it's not his work. The Wikipedia-link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_annotation_symbols

thank you! i'll look into it.

You could try using a software like ChessX, which allows you to load a PGN file and then annotate