auth_request_otp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses a significant privacy behavior (data goes directly to Milkbasket, not through AI), which is valuable. However, it does not mention side effects like SMS delivery, rate limits, or error conditions.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff: purpose, usage order, and an important user reassurance. The privacy note earns its place as an actionable agent instruction, and the description is front-loaded with the core action.

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 simple single-param tool, the description covers purpose, sequencing, and a key privacy concern. It does not explain the response format or failure scenarios, but given the simplicity and the schema coverage, it is fairly complete.

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 covers the phone parameter 100% with a clear description, min/max lengths, and an example. The description adds no extra param details, but with full schema coverage the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Request a one-time password (OTP) to be sent to the given phone number.' It also distinguishes from siblings by saying 'Call this first to initiate login,' which clarifies its role relative to auth_verify_otp and auth_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?

The description gives clear when-to-use guidance: 'Call this first to initiate login.' It does not explicitly name alternatives like auth_verify_otp, but the context makes the sequential usage clear.

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