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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses irreversibility ('Permanently delete'), the return payload ('Returns the deleted API key id and a deleted flag'), token cost, and a prerequisite dependency. It doesn't cover error handling or permissions but is more transparent than typical deletion tools.

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 four succinct sentences, front-loaded with the main action, then prerequisites, return value, and cost. Every sentence is informative without any fluff or repetition.

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 delete operation with two parameters, the description adequately covers purpose, sequence, return value, and cost. It could mention revoke_api_key as an alternative for non-destructive operations, but the 'permanently' signal makes the tool's use case clear. Overall, it is complete for its complexity.

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 description coverage is 100% and already documents both parameters well, including the optional behavior of clerk_instance_id. The description only restates what the schema provides ('or omit it to use the default account'), adding no extra semantic meaning 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 opens with 'Permanently delete an API key from a connected Clerk application,' which is a specific verb+resource statement. It clearly distinguishes from sibling clerk.revoke_api_key via 'permanently,' signaling a destructive final action.

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Call clerk.get_connected_accounts first' and explains how to use clerk_instance_id vs default account. Does not explicitly contrast with revoke_api_key, but the 'permanently' wording implies when not to use this tool.

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