Get one-time code

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It explains that it generates the current code and returns the code plus seconds until rotation. However, it omits behavioral details such as prerequisites (e.g., vault must be unlocked) or error behavior if the entry lacks an OTP secret, leaving some ambiguity.

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 two concise sentences, starts with the primary action, and includes the key output details. Every sentence provides useful information without unnecessary fluff.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the description adequately covers purpose and return value. The only missing context is implicit prerequisites (e.g., vault unlocked), but the sibling tool list (unlock_vault, lock_vault) helps fill that gap. Overall, it is complete enough for an agent to use 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, as both parameters (uuid and vault) have detailed descriptions. The description does not add parameter-level semantics beyond referring to 'an entry that stores an OTP secret,' which aligns with the uuid parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already handles parameter meaning.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Generates') and resource ('current TOTP / two-factor one-time code'). It also distinguishes from siblings like get_password by focusing on OTP entries and describing the return value, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context by specifying it is for 'an entry that stores an OTP secret,' indicating when the tool should be used. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it stops short of providing explicit exclusion criteria.

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