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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it doesn't say whether the session is invalidated server-side, whether other devices are affected, or what the user state becomes afterward.

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?

A single short sentence that is front-loaded with the action. The 'Business —' prefix is wasted space that duplicates the title, but the core sentence is tight and unambiguous.

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-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient; the output schema covers return values. The phrase 'in this app' usefully scopes the logout, though the absence of any prerequisite or session-scope detail leaves a minor gap.

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 schema carries no parameter burden. Per the baseline for a 0-parameter tool, a 4 is appropriate since there is no semantic gap for the description to fill.

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 and resource — 'Sign the user out' — so an agent knows exactly what the tool does. There is no sibling that performs authentication or session termination, so sibling differentiation isn't strictly required, but the 'Business —' prefix is redundant filler that adds no distinguishing information.

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 offers no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., must be logged in), and no mention of alternatives or conditions under which logout is inappropriate. It only restates the action.

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