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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that it returns a summary, indicates the need for a prior call, and explains the default-account behavior. However, it does not detail error behavior, permissions, or that it is a non-mutating operation beyond the word 'Retrieve'.

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 four sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: purpose, prerequisite, parameter guidance, and return type. It is front-loaded and contains no filler.

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 retrieval tool with an output schema and full schema coverage, the description covers the essential prerequisites and parameter usage. It could be more explicit about differentiation from list_oauth_applications, but the context signals and sibling names provide enough clarity 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how clerk_instance_id relates to the connected account and the option to omit it for the default account, which goes beyond what the schema provides.

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: 'Retrieve a single OAuth application by id from a connected Clerk application.' It specifies the resource (OAuth application), the operation (retrieve), and the scope (single, by id), which distinguishes it from list_oauth_applications or other OAuth 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 a prerequisite and a conditional usage instruction: 'Call clerk.get_connected_accounts first. Pass clerk_instance_id to target a specific connection, or omit it to use the default account.' This tells the agent how to use the tool correctly, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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