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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return value and the cost, but does not mention irreversibility, required permissions, error conditions, or side effects beyond 'Delete'. This adds some context but leaves important behavioral gaps.

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 sentences, each serving a clear purpose: purpose, usage instruction, return value, and cost. It is front-loaded with the core action, with no redundant or vague 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 description includes a prerequisite, parameter targeting instruction, return value disclosure, and cost. With an output schema present, return details are covered. However, it omits failure scenarios and permission requirements, which would make it more complete for a destructive operation.

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% for both parameters, so the schema already defines connection_id and clerk_instance_id thoroughly. The description reinforces the instance id behavior with 'Pass clerk_instance_id to target a specific connection, or omit it to use the default account' but adds no substantial new meaning over 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 'Delete an enterprise SSO connection from a connected Clerk application', which is a specific verb+resource statement. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_enterprise_connection, update_enterprise_connection, and create_enterprise_connection.

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 prerequisite: 'Call clerk.get_connected_accounts first' and explains when to pass clerk_instance_id vs omit it to use the default account. This gives clear context for usage, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not-to-use scenarios.

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