get_totp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the code is 'current' and that the item must have 2FA configured, but it does not mention time-based expiration, read-only nature, or failure behavior when 2FA is not configured. Some context is provided, but more could be shared.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and immediately conveys the tool's purpose, earning a perfect score for conciseness.

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 is simple with two well-defined parameters and no output schema. However, the description lacks details about return format, time-sensitivity, or error cases. It is adequate but not fully complete given the absence of annotations and output schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, both parameters have basic descriptions ('Item ID' and 'Vault share ID'). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('current TOTP one-time code for an item that has 2FA configured'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like view_item, generate_password, or view_secret by specifying the exact purpose and precondition.

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 implies the tool should be used when a TOTP code is needed for an item with 2FA, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives. There are no exclusions or alternative tool names mentioned.

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