Clerk

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation, and the description's 'Get' wording is consistent with that. The description adds only the vague notion of 'patterns' as part of the output, but does not describe output format, defaults, or any other runtime behavior.

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 short sentence with no filler, making it easy to scan. It is concise, though it could have used the available space to add sibling differentiation or usage guidance.

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 one-optional-parameter read-only lookup, the schema and readOnlyHint cover much of the needed context. However, the lack of any description of return content, fallback behavior when slug is omitted, or relationship to list_clerk_sdk_snippets leaves a moderate gap.

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 fully documents the slug parameter, including examples and the distinction between snippet slugs and bundle names. The description itself adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already 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 names a clear verb and resource: 'Get Clerk SDK code snippets and patterns.' It is not a tautology, but it does not distinguish this tool from its sibling list_clerk_sdk_snippets, so there is no explicit differentiation.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus list_clerk_sdk_snippets. The schema explains the slug parameter, but the description itself provides no context about when a specific snippet lookup is appropriate or when listing is better.

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

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe read operation. The description adds that the operation returns both snippets and bundles and supports tag filtering, but it does not disclose pagination or response format. Given the annotation coverage, this level of additional context is acceptable.

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 two front-loaded sentences. The first states the primary action and scope directly, and the second explains the filtering capability. There is no redundant language or unnecessary detail.

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 tool is simple: one optional parameter, read-only annotation, and no output schema. The description covers the core listing behavior and the only parameter. It omits pagination details, but for a list tool of this simplicity the essential information is present.

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% as the only parameter 'tag' has a detailed description with examples. The description's 'Filter by tag' essentially restates the parameter's purpose without adding new meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'List' with the resource 'all available Clerk SDK snippets and bundles'. It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'clerk_sdk_snippet' by referring to the entire collection rather than an individual snippet.

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 implies this is the tool for browsing all snippets ('List all available...') and hints at filtering, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over 'clerk_sdk_snippet' or mention scenarios where the singular tool is more appropriate. The usage context is clear but excluding alternatives is left to inference.

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