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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It warns that the returned secret is a high-privilege credential, advises against logging/exposing it, and notes the 5-token cost. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, though it doesn't explicitly state the read-only nature or potential side effects.

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 plus brief notes, with the purpose front-loaded. Each sentence earns its place: purpose, sensitivity warning, usage instruction, return value, and cost. 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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the output schema, and full parameter documentation, the description is quite complete. It covers the essential usage flow (call get_connected_accounts first), the sensitivity warning, and the cost. The only gap is lack of explicit alternatives or error conditions, but those aren't necessary here.

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 descriptions. The description restates the clerk_instance_id behavior from the schema ('Pass clerk_instance_id to target a specific connection, or omit it'), but adds no new semantic detail beyond that.

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 tool reveals an API key secret, using the specific verb 'Reveal' and the resource 'API key in a connected Clerk application'. This distinguishes it from sibling getters like clerk.get_api_key that likely return metadata, and from revoke/update tools.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: call clerk.get_connected_accounts first, and pass clerk_instance_id to target a specific connection or omit for default. This gives clear context for when to use the tool but doesn't 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.