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

Annotations only declare the mutation/safety profile (readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false); the description adds real behavioral value by disclosing the CSRF/bootstrap prerequisite and, importantly, that only the current session is revoked while other product sessions remain active. It does not cover error behavior or whether re-authentication is required.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then prerequisite, then side-effect scope. No filler and each sentence carries distinct information.

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 zero-param state-changing action with no output schema, the description covers the prerequisite and the blast radius, which is the key information an agent needs. Minor gap: no mention of failure modes or post-logout state of the caller.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no arguments are needed and instead documents the ambient credential context the call relies on.

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 ('Revoke the current session') with the exact scope of the operation. No sibling tool competes with logout, so the purpose is unambiguous on its own.

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 implies when it applies by describing the required bootstrap/CSRF context, but it never states when to call it versus when not to, or what happens if the prerequisite is missing. There is no alternative tool for this action, so the guidance gap is modest rather than severe.

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