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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return fields (id, name, client_id, redirect_uris, scopes, public flag, endpoint URLs, total_count) and the token cost (5 tokens), plus the prerequisite call. It does not discuss potential errors or pagination, but for a read-only list operation, this is solid transparency.

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?

Four tight sentences: purpose, usage instruction, return values, and cost. No redundancy, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence earns its place.

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 has low complexity (one optional param) and an output schema exists, so return values are already specified. The description adds valuable context: the OAuth provider scenario, the prerequisite call, and the cost. Everything needed to invoke and interpret the result is covered.

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?

The input schema already fully documents clerk_instance_id with the same info ('Clerk instance id (ins_...) from clerk.get_connected_accounts. Omit to use the default connected account.'). The description repeats this information without adding new semantics, so the 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 clearly states the verb and resource: 'List OAuth applications registered in a connected Clerk application when Clerk acts as an OAuth identity provider.' This specific context differentiates it from sibling tools like list_api_keys or list_organizations, and the plural form makes it distinct from get_oauth_application.

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 an explicit prerequisite ('Call clerk.get_connected_accounts first') and explains how to use the optional parameter ('Pass clerk_instance_id to target a specific connection, or omit it to use the default account'). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not to use, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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