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 that the token is single-use, that revoking invalidates it, and that the action is 'Sensitive'. It also notes the return value. While irreversibility is implied, the description could be more explicit about 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 compact and front-loaded with the action. It efficiently includes the core function, sensitivity warning, prerequisite steps, targeting options, return value, and cost—all without extraneous content.

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 moderate complexity (3 params, output schema present), the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, prerequisites, parameter targeting, and return value. There is no need to explain output structure since an output schema exists.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds procedural value beyond the schema by instructing to call clerk.get_connected_accounts first and clarifying how clerk_instance_id selects a connection, which is not fully captured in the parameter descriptions.

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 action ('Revoke'), the resource ('admin portal link token'), and the scope ('by id in a connected Clerk instance'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like clerk.create_admin_portal_link_token and clerk.revoke_actor_token by naming the exact token type.

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 clear context: it instructs to call clerk.get_connected_accounts first and explains how to target a specific connection via clerk_instance_id or omit it for the default. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the usage scenario is well-defined.

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