Activate duo put

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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-readOnly, openWorld, non-destructive mutation. The description adds that the mutation enables or updates Duo 2FA, but it does not disclose authentication requirements, side effects, or what happens to existing Duo configuration.

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 very short and front-loaded, but it is a terse fragment rather than a sufficient explanation. The cryptic '(PUT alias)' parenthetical does not earn its place without clarifying the alternative it refers to.

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?

This is a mutation tool with three opaque parameters, no output schema, and only generic safety annotations. The description says what the operation does broadly, but it omits prerequisites, parameter guidance, and behavioral effects needed to invoke it correctly.

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 defines three parameters (form, params, json_body) with zero percent description coverage, and the description provides no meaning, format, or examples for any of them. An agent cannot determine what to put in these fields from the definition alone.

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: 'Enable/update Duo 2FA'. It also hints at a PUT-specific alias, but it does not explain how this differs from the sibling vaultwarden_activate_duo tool.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus vaultwarden_activate_duo or other 2FA activation methods. The '(PUT alias)' phrase implies a transport variant but does not provide usable selection criteria.

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