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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose one concrete side effect ('wipe its cookies'), which is real behavioral information beyond the schema, but it says nothing about reversibility, whether the session is invalidated server-side, or authorization requirements for a destructive call.

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?

One short front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though terse to the point of leaving obvious gaps unaddressed.

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?

A destructive, annotation-less tool with an undocumented required parameter and no output schema needs more than seven words. Missing: what 'session' is, whether the end is immediate and irreversible, and any effect on concurrent callers.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'session' parameter, and it does not. It never says whether 'session' is an ID, token, or name, nor what format is expected.

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 ('End') and resource ('a session'), and the cookie-wipe clause clarifies the effect. It is distinguishable from siblings like open_session or session_fetch by implication, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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 word 'now' hints at immediacy but gives no condition for choosing this tool over open_session, session_fetch, or delete_login. No prerequisites, no when-not-to-use guidance.

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