get_my_otp_uri

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully communicate behavior. It correctly implies this is a read-only retrieval ('Get'), but it does not explicitly state that it has no side effects, whether OTP must already be enabled, or how it relates to enable_my_otp. Some behavioral context is present but not fully explicit.

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 with no fluff. It efficiently conveys the action, resource, and purpose without exceeding necessary length.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers what is returned and its intended use. A minor gap is that it does not mention prerequisites or the relationship with enable/disable_my_otp, but the tool is simple enough that the description is essentially complete.

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 tool has no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds context about the output's purpose (encoding in a QR code) which is helpful, though not required for parameters. No additional parameter explanation is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the exact resource ('otpauth:// URI') and purpose ('setting up TOTP 2FA') on the current user account. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like enable_my_otp and disable_my_otp, which are about enabling/disabling rather than retrieving the setup URI.

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 clearly indicates the use case: setting up TOTP 2FA. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or name alternatives (e.g., 'use enable_my_otp after generating the URI'). The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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