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 destructive nature ('Delete all TOTP authenticators'), the dependency on get_connected_accounts, and the return value ('Returns the updated user object'). It does not mention reversibility or permissions, but the action is inherently destructive and clearly stated.

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 concise with four focused sentences: purpose, usage prerequisite, parameter guidance, and return value. No wasted words, and the most important action is front-loaded.

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 (2 params, output schema exists), the description covers purpose, prerequisite call, parameter behavior, return value, and cost. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema already documents both parameters. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema says, though it reinforces the workflow around clerk_instance_id.

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 action and resource: 'Delete all TOTP authenticators for a Clerk user.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_user_backup_codes or disable_user_mfa, which operate on different resources.

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?

It provides clear usage context by instructing to call clerk.get_connected_accounts first and explaining how to use clerk_instance_id (target a connection or omit for default). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the resource specificity makes the intended use clear.

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