Clerk
Server Details
Access Clerk authentication docs, SDK snippets, and quickstart guides
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one retrieves a specific snippet, the other lists available snippets. No overlap or ambiguity.
Both tool names follow the same pattern: 'clerk_sdk_snippet' and 'list_clerk_sdk_snippets' - consistent verb_noun structure with clear pluralization.
Only two tools, but they serve a narrow, focused purpose (snippet retrieval and listing). This is slightly thin but not unreasonable for a minimal reference server.
The server covers reading and listing snippets, which is typical for a reference library. Missing create/update/delete operations, but those may be intentionally omitted for a read-only snippet database.
Available Tools
2 toolsclerk_sdk_snippetClerk SDK snippetCRead-onlyInspect
Get Clerk SDK code snippets and patterns.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | No | SDK snippet slug (e.g. "use-user", "use-auth") OR bundle name (e.g. "b2b-saas", "organizations"). | b2b-saas |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | Requested Clerk SDK snippet or bundle in Markdown. |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds no additional behavioral context—no mention of response format, filtering, or any constraints. It does not contradict annotations, but it also provides no extra insight beyond what the name implies.
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 a single sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than concise in a helpful way. It omits usage guidance and differentiation, making it too minimal to be effective.
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?
For a single-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the schema covers the parameter semantics well. However, the description leaves gaps around how to select a slug and when to use this tool versus the sibling, so completeness is only marginal.
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 schema already fully documents the single parameter (slug) with examples and a clear description, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds nothing beyond the schema's parameter documentation, so the baseline score 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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get Clerk SDK code snippets and patterns'), but it does not differentiate from the sibling tool list_clerk_sdk_snippets. It is not a tautology, but it is vague about what distinguishes this tool from listing snippets.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus list_clerk_sdk_snippets. The description lacks any contextual cues, alternative routing, or exclusions, so an agent cannot determine the right tool for a given situation.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_clerk_sdk_snippetsList Clerk SDK snippetsARead-onlyInspect
List all available Clerk SDK snippets and bundles. Filter by tag to find specific functionality.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tag | No | Filter snippets by tag (e.g. "auth", "organizations", "b2b", "billing") |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | Available Clerk SDK snippets and bundles in Markdown. |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate readOnly and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds no extra behavioral context such as return format, pagination, or side effects beyond the basic listing and filtering.
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 succinct, consisting of two short sentences that efficiently convey the core function and the optional filter. No redundant information or verbose phrasing.
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?
For a simple read-only listing tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context to understand its purpose and basic usage. No additional details are needed for correct invocation.
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 single parameter 'tag' is fully documented in the schema with examples. The description merely echoes 'filter by tag' without adding new parameter-specific details, so it adds minimal value beyond the schema coverage.
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 it lists all Clerk SDK snippets and bundles, with an optional tag filter. It distinguishes the plural listing operation from the singular sibling 'clerk_sdk_snippet' implicitly, but does not explicitly name or contrast the alternative.
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 explains what the tool does but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over the sibling tool for retrieving a single snippet. The filter example is helpful but does not cover use-case scenarios or limitations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
2 tool updates
- Changed
clerk_sdk_snippet1 field changed- changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema", + "additionalProperties": false, + "properties": { + "text": { + "description": "Requested Clerk SDK snippet or bundle in Markdown.", + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "text" + ], + "type": "object" +}
- Changed
list_clerk_sdk_snippets1 field changed- changed
Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{ + "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema", + "additionalProperties": false, + "properties": { + "text": { + "description": "Available Clerk SDK snippets and bundles in Markdown.", + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "text" + ], + "type": "object" +}
2 tool updates
- Changed
clerk_sdk_snippet2 fields changed- changed
Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema" - removed
Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -false
- Changed
list_clerk_sdk_snippets2 fields changed- changed
Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema" - removed
Input schema / additionalPropertiesRemoved value: -false
2 tool updates
- First observed
clerk_sdk_snippet - First observed
list_clerk_sdk_snippets
Related MCP Connectors
Provides access to Avalara developer documentation, integration guides, and code examples
Search PayU docs, browse the payment integration catalog, and fetch production-ready code.
Search Checkout.com docs and API reference, plus manage payments, refunds, and payment links.
Get up-to-date, version-specific documentation and code examples from official sources directly in…
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceProvides access to Better Auth framework documentation, authentication provider configurations, database adapter setup, and generates production-ready authentication configs for modern web frameworks.62-
- AlicenseBqualityNot gradedmaintenanceProvides AI agents with access to Statly SDK and API documentation, enabling search across docs, retrieval of language-specific SDK references, code examples, and REST API information.4-
- FlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceProvides access to 600+ documentation libraries from DevDocs.io including Python, JavaScript, React, Django, and more. Enables searching, browsing, and retrieving documentation content directly through Claude Desktop.55-
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceEnables interaction with AIApp BaaS authentication system through keyword-based document search and automatic generation of framework-specific client code. Supports React, Next.js, Vue, and Vanilla JS with TypeScript integration and automatic project ID injection.341MIT