pve_tfa_get

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

Clearly declares 'read-only' behavior, which is critical since annotations are absent. Adds warning about deletion risks. No additional behavioral details like auth needs or rate limits, but these are less critical for a simple read tool.

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?

Three concise sentences, no wasted words. Front-loads the core purpose and read-only nature, then specifies behavior and provides a safety note.

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 presence of an output schema, the description appropriately summarizes return contents (factor type, id, metadata). It covers the essential usage scenarios, though it could mention permission implications.

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. Description adds meaning for tfa_id (omit vs specify) and implicitly clarifies userid format. Proximo_target not elaborated, but overall adds value beyond 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?

Description explicitly states 'Read a user's TFA entries (read-only)', specifies return behavior (list vs single entry), and distinguishes from sibling pve_tfa_delete by advising when to use that tool.

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 clear context for when to omit or specify tfa_id, and references pve_tfa_delete for removals. However, it does not differentiate from sibling pve_tfa_list, which may cause ambiguity.

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