confirm_two_factor_setup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that one-time backup codes are returned, but it omits whether confirming setup enables 2FA, what permissions are required, whether backup codes are shown only once, and how invalid or expired tokens are handled for this security-sensitive mutation.

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 filler. It states the action and the key outcome efficiently.

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?

With no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description should do more for a security-sensitive state-changing operation. It mentions backup codes but omits prerequisites, token semantics, state effects, and backup-code handling details needed for confident invocation.

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 has one required parameter, token, with zero description coverage. The description does not explain that token should be a six-character TOTP code or how it relates to the confirmation flow, leaving the agent to infer its meaning from the tool name and min/max length constraints.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Confirm self-hosted Umami 2FA setup', and adds the outcome 'receive one-time backup codes'. This is clearly distinct from siblings like initiate_two_factor_setup, cancel_two_factor_setup, and complete_two_factor_login, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 phrase 'Confirm ... setup' implies this should be used after initiating 2FA setup, but the description does not state prerequisites, when-not-to-use conditions, or direct alternatives such as complete_two_factor_login for login confirmation. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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