There are few "musts" in language. There are in fact no grammar police who will incarcerate you for mistakes. Instead, ask yourself what are the consequences? The worst consequence of poor choices is often that your meaning is not understood. Even if the reader is confused for only moments and then figures it out, you don't want to put obstacles in the way of your communication. Other consequences might include bad grades from a teacher who has certain expectations about usage, or scorn in certain social contexts.
I'm a big fan of hyphens in compound modifiers. But I don't think even I can claim that every single compound must always have them. I'm a fan of them because omitting them often creates confusion, but this phrase runs little danger of that. The compound starts the sentence, and we have no reason to interpret "to use" as an independent verb.
If, on the other hand, we had:
Betty Crocker's collection of cake mixes makes easy baking recipes
... and if the intent was "makes easy-baking recipes," that is "makes recipes that are easy to bake," there's a danger that instead I'll come across "makes easy" and parse it as its own phrase, and "baking" as a verb, and interpret the sentence as "makes the act of baking recipes easy."
So in the short, easy clause you present, I wouldn't say that hyphenation is a "must," though they would not be unwelcome. It might depend especially on the context: if this is a tagline for a company ("KitchenAid. Easy to use kitchen tools to simplify your workload."), then I might even eschew the hyphens for design purposes, if they looked clunky in the ad.