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

Annotations declare destructiveHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds essential detail: Bowmark drops cookies, ends the site session if supported, and keeps the login with status logged_out. It also explains the meaning of siteSignedOut: true, going well beyond the structured annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: the first sentence states the action and id source, followed by behavioral details and usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no fluff.

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 single-id tool with no output schema, the description explains side effects, the site logout capability, the meaning of the response fields, and the distinction from delete_connection. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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?

The schema covers the single id parameter at 100% with a description that already states it comes from list_connections. The tool description repeats this source but adds no new semantics beyond that, so the baseline 3 is appropriate for high schema coverage.

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 ('Sign a saved login out') and resource (saved login/connection), and explicitly contrasts it with delete_connection, distinguishing it from siblings. The first sentence names the action and the identifier source, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 states when to call it ('Call this when the user asks to sign out of a site') and identifies the alternative tool (delete_connection) with its different outcome (forgets the entry, leaves the site session alive). This gives clear guidance on selection.

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