One thing to consider is the way the bass player you are recording plays. DI does indeed have greater clarity, if we are defining clarity as being a more accurate representation of what comes out of the instrument. However, most players are used to hearing what comes out of the amp rather than the instrument, so "clarity" can be a problem with players who play with more of an aggressive percussive attack with their plucking hand.
If they just politely pluck (or pick) the strings, DI mixed with a miked amp sound would probably be my first choice. However, if they bash away while snapping and popping, for example, it can sound musical through the amp, but a lot of clicking, crashing and bashing noises will probably come through the DI channel.
It is most often better to be flexible and allow the player to play the way they play, rather than forcing them to change their technique for the sake of the recording. With a more aggressive player, I would probably still record a DI track, but would be prepared to turn it way down in the mix, or even to discard it altogether. I would probably also not listen to it much while recording once levels were set. But, if you do not record the DI track you can't wish it into existence if you later decide you should have done so. And it costs nothing to record it while the tracks are being laid, so there is really no reason not to do it, unless you just don't have an extra track available.
I think it is best not to say "This is how I record and mix bass," but rather to say "This is how I am going to record and mix your bass" once you have determined what sort of a player you have on your hands. Basically, I it comes down to "Record both, but use whatever sounds best for the final mix."