enable_my_otp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the mutating action but gives no information about side effects, prerequisites (e.g., whether a URI must already be generated), success/failure conditions, or behavior if OTP is already enabled.

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, front-loaded sentence that communicates the core action, target, and requirement without any waste. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool, the description plus schema cover the basic purpose and input. However, as a mutating action with no annotations, it lacks context on prerequisites and side effects, leaving some gaps for the agent.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage for the single parameter otp_attempt, including its description. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond restating the need for a 6-digit code, so baseline 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 clearly states the action ('Enable TOTP 2FA'), the target ('current user account'), and the method ('by confirming a 6-digit code'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_my_otp_uri and disable_my_otp by focusing on the enabling step.

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 usage when the user has a 6-digit code to confirm, but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_my_otp_uri or disable_my_otp. No exclusions or alternative conditions are stated.

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