verify-email

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action but does not mention side effects (e.g., email becomes verified), potential errors (wrong code), rate limits, or authorization requirements. Minimal behavioral insight is provided.

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 with no filler, concisely conveying the core action and resource. Every word adds value, achieving maximum efficiency.

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?

No output schema is provided, but the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., success/failure indicators). Additionally, it lacks contextual details such as prerequisites (e.g., having a pending verification request) or that this is a final step in the registration flow.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, and the parameter 'code' is described in the schema as '6-digit OTP code from email'. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 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 clearly states the verb 'verify' and resource 'agent email' with the method 'OTP code', distinguishing it from siblings like resend-verification (which sends the code) and register-agent (which creates the account).

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?

Usage is implied: after receiving the OTP via email, this tool verifies it. However, no explicit context is given about when to use it (e.g., as the second step after registration), and no alternatives or prerequisites are mentioned.

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