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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It states that the tool returns the updated OAuth application summary and includes cost, but it does not warn about side effects (e.g., replacing redirect URIs) or clarify that unspecified fields remain unchanged. The mutation intent is clear from 'Update,' but richer disclosure would be beneficial.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Each sentence provides distinct value: purpose, prerequisite/usage, return type, and cost. No wasted words.

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 description covers purpose, usage prerequisite, return value, and cost. An output schema exists, so return details are covered. The main gap is the lack of explicit behavioral notes about partial update semantics or consequences, but given the high schema coverage, it is largely complete.

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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for each parameter (e.g., 'Replacement list of allowed redirect URIs,' 'Space-delimited scopes'). The description adds brief guidance for clerk_instance_id but does not provide much beyond what the schema already states. Baseline 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 'Update an OAuth application in a connected Clerk application,' specifying the verb (update), resource (OAuth application), and context (connected Clerk application). This distinguishes it from sibling create/get/delete 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 explicitly instructs the agent to call clerk.get_connected_accounts first and explains how to use clerk_instance_id to target a specific connection or fall back to the default account. This provides clear operational context, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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