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

Goes well beyond the annotations: it explains what actually gets dropped (cookies), that the site session may be terminated when supported, and that the saved login itself is KEPT with status `logged_out`. It also interprets response fields (`siteLogout`, `siteSignedOut`) despite there being no output schema, clarifying exactly what is destroyed versus preserved.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and side effects, then the routing rule. Dense and largely waste-free, though a few clauses (e.g., the parenthetical about `siteLogout: "supported"`) could be tightened without losing meaning.

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-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the trigger, the side effects, the alternative tool, the retained state, and the meaning of return values. Nothing an agent needs in order 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single `id` parameter is already documented as coming from `list_connections`. The description restates that provenance but adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Sign a saved login out') and explicitly scopes it by the id returned from `list_connections`. It also pre-emptively differentiates itself from `delete_connection` by naming that sibling and contrasting their effects.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ('Call this when the user asks to sign out of a site') and names the alternative action plus its consequence ('delete_connection ... leaves the site session alive'), so the routing decision is fully specified.

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