totp_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing beyond 'list'. It does not say whether TOTP secrets are returned in the response (a real sensitivity question for this resource), nor anything about ordering or result size.

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?

A single six-word sentence that front-loads the verb and resource with zero filler. Nothing is padded or restated.

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 no-argument list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral information, and it omits whether secret material is exposed and what shape results take. Adequate to call, but not complete for a security-sensitive tool.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The word 'all' usefully confirms there are no filtering options to supply.

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?

Specific verb (List) plus resource (stored TOTP configurations) with the scope word 'all' making clear it is an unfiltered enumeration. It implicitly distinguishes itself from totp_code (generates a code) and totp_store (writes), though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 only implied: an agent can infer this is the discovery/enumeration call before totp_code or totp_delete. There is no explicit when-to-use statement and no guidance on prerequisites versus the other totp_* siblings.

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