enter_otp

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors. It only states 'enter the OTP' without explaining side effects (e.g., what happens on success/failure), authentication requirements, or whether it mutates state. This is insufficient for a security-sensitive operation.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary detail. It is front-loaded but could be expanded without being verbose to cover behavioral and usage aspects.

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 role in authentication and the presence of an output schema, the description should explain the broader flow (e.g., step after login) and result implications. It fails to provide this context, making it incomplete.

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 single parameter 'otp' is only described as 'the OTP received on your phone'. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should specify format (e.g., numeric length, expiry) but does not. It adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 purpose: entering an OTP to complete authentication. The verb 'enter' and resource 'OTP' are specific, and the context 'complete authentication' distinguishes it from login tools like 'login' and 'check_login', though not 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'login' or 'check_login'). The description does not mention prerequisites or the flow context, such as being called after receiving an OTP.

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