generate_2fa_config

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose side effects. It only mentions the return value (QR code data) but does not state whether generating a new secret invalidates an existing 2FA configuration, whether it activates 2FA, or if any authorization is required. This lack of disclosure is risky for a security-related tool.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with a parenthetical clarifying the return. No filler words; every word adds value.

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?

While the tool is simple with no parameters, the description leaves critical questions unanswered: Does this secret activation require a subsequent call to set_2fa? What format does the QR code data take? Does it replace any existing secret? Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for an agent to fully understand the workflow.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is no ambiguity in input. The schema already reflects this, and the description adds nothing needed for parameters. Baseline for no-parameter tools is 4.

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 uses the specific verb 'Generate' and identifies the resource 'two-factor authentication secret,' and adds the return value context 'returns QR code data.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_2fa and get_2fa_status.

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?

No explicit usage guidance is provided. The description does not mention when to use this vs set_2fa or remove_2fa, or whether it is a prerequisite for enabling 2FA. Usage is implied only by the tool name and the nature of the action.

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