Submit one-time code

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully communicates sequencing and an OTP-required precondition, but it does not disclose success/failure behavior, whether the OTP is consumed, session effects, or expected outputs after submission.

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?

Two tightly written sentences. The conditional trigger is front-loaded, and every clause contributes actionable information without repetition.

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 description clearly positions the tool within the login sequence but omits post-submission behavior and error handling. Without an output schema or annotations, an agent might not know what statuses to expect or how to react after sending the code.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds slight context by noting that loginId is the same one used in previous steps, but code is already described well in the schema. No major extra meaning is provided.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Submits the code Banco General sent to the user.' It also anchors the tool within the login flow as 'Step 3 of 3,' clearly distinguishing it from related login tools like bg_login_start and bg_login_answer.

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?

Provides an explicit trigger condition: 'only needed when bg_login_answer returned status "otp_required".' This tells an agent exactly when to invoke the tool and ties it to a prior step's output.

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