submit_mfa_code

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It states that submitting the code completes login and directs the user to check email, covering the basic flow. However, it does not disclose potential issues like code expiration, one-time use, or failure modes, which are relevant for an authentication action.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and purpose, followed by a clear usage trigger. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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?

The tool is simple, with one parameter fully documented in the schema, and the description provides the trigger condition for use. It is complete for the tool's narrow purpose, though it could mention what happens after successful submission (e.g., session established) or error handling, but this is not critical for a simple code submission action.

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%, with the 'code' property described as 'The 6-digit verification code from your email'. The tool description reiterates the same information ('6-digit MFA verification code', 'check your email'), adding no new semantic detail 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 action 'Submit a 6-digit MFA verification code' and its purpose 'to complete ParentSquare login'. This verb+resource+goal structure distinguishes it from sibling tools, which are all data retrieval operations.

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 gives explicit context: 'When a ParentSquare tool returns an MFA error, check your email for the code.' This tells the agent when to use the tool, though it doesn't explicitly discuss exclusions or alternatives, which are unnecessary given the unique authentication purpose.

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