ftrack_generate_totp

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral impacts, but it only states the operation. It does not mention whether the secret is returned, whether existing TOTP settings are overwritten, what permissions are required, or any side effects.

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, non-redundant sentence that conveys the basic purpose efficiently. It lacks extra detail, but not at the expense of conciseness, making it reasonably well-structured.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, and the description does not clarify what the function returns or how the generated secret relates to the user's 2FA setup. This leaves important gaps for an agent, especially given the presence of related TOTP-manipulation tools.

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 fully describes the single parameter user_id (coverage 100%), and the description reiterates that the secret is 'for a user' without adding new meaning. This aligns with the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Generate a new TOTP secret') and the target ('for a user'), using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate this from sibling tools like ftrack_configure_totp, which may also involve TOTP secret generation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ftrack_configure_totp or ftrack_disable_2fa. There is no context about prerequisites, typical use cases, or situations to avoid.

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