Mendelian randomization (MR) is widely used to infer causal relationships using genetic variants as instrumental variables, yet the selection of genetic instruments is not always given sufficient attention. Many MR studies rely on default linkage disequilibrium (LD) clumping parameters (r2 10). Notably, increasing the number of SNPs did not consistently improve instrument quality, highlighting a trade-off between instrument strength and potential pleiotropy. We demonstrate that universal reliance on default LD clumping parameters can lead to suboptimal instruments. We propose a pragmatic framework for instrument selection based on empirical evaluation of strength metrics, improving the robustness and transparency of MR analyses across different exposure types.