ftrack_configure_otp

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral implications but only says 'Configure OTP,' which implies a mutation without explaining whether it activates, resets, or requires prior setup. It does not mention permissions, reversibility, or side effects such as sending an email or overwriting existing settings.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a tool with only two parameters.

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?

Although the schema fully documents parameters, the description lacks information about expected behavior, return values, or usage context. For a tool that likely has side effects (configuring OTP), the absence of any guidance on prerequisites or consequences makes it incomplete for an agent to select and invoke 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 input schema already provides 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, relying entirely on the schema's simple definitions of user_id and otp_type.

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 'Configure' and resource 'OTP for a user', making the core action identifiable. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool ftrack_configure_totp, since TOTP is a type of OTP and the distinction is left ambiguous.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like ftrack_configure_totp, ftrack_generate_totp, or ftrack_disable_2fa. There are no preconditions, exclusions, or mention of user state requirements.

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