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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool removes a domain, describes the return value ('deleted domain id and a deleted flag'), and explains instance-targeting behavior. It also notes a 10-token cost. It does not explicitly state irreversibility, but given the clear 'Remove' verb and return flag, it is sufficiently transparent.

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 about four sentences, each serving a purpose: the core action, prerequisite/parameter guidance, return value, and cost. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff.

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?

This is a simple two-parameter tool with a good output schema. The description covers the prerequisite connection setup, optional parameter behavior, and expected return, making it complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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% and both parameters have descriptive details (domain_id format, clerk_instance_id source and default behavior). The description reinforces the clerk_instance_id guidance but adds little beyond the schema, so a baseline of 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Remove a custom domain from a connected Clerk instance.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like clerk.delete_organization_domain, which targets organization domains, and domains.* tools that operate on domain registration.

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 explicitly instructs the user to 'Call clerk.get_connected_accounts first' and explains how to choose a target via clerk_instance_id or default to the default account. It gives clear contextual guidance for using the tool, though it does not mention alternatives or exclusions.

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