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

The description discloses key behavioral details: it returns a live 6-digit code and explicitly states that the underlying secret is never disclosed. This aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation and adds meaningful transparency about what the agent can and cannot expect from the operation.

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 description is concise and well-structured. Two sentences provide the purpose, the return value, and a key safety property without any redundant or filler content.

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?

Given the simple two-parameter interface and the presence of clear annotations and sibling context, the description is complete enough for an agent to call the tool correctly. It clearly states what is returned and what is not disclosed, so no important context is missing.

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?

The schema has full coverage of both parameters. The id description is minimal but adequate ('Credential ID.'), and the agentId description adds useful context about when it is optional ('Agent ID that owns the credential. Optional when using an agent-bound credential.'). This goes slightly beyond the raw schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: to get the current TOTP code for a credential with a TOTP secret configured. It distinguishes itself from related credential tools like vault_credential_get and vault_credential_use by focusing specifically on returning the live 6-digit code.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool by indicating it applies only to credentials with a TOTP secret configured. It does not explicitly contrast it with sibling tools like vault_credential_get or vault_credential_use, but the conditional phrasing provides adequate guidance for an agent to select it appropriately.

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