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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds valuable behavioral context: it clears only the MCP session, not the account, and it shows the welcome card with Connect again. This goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand the side effects.

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 sentences, each earning its place: what it does, when to use it, and what the user sees afterward. No fluff, front-loaded with the core action.

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 and annotations, the description is complete. It covers the action, the scope, the trigger phrases, and the post-condition. The only minor gap is not explicitly naming ucode_sign_out as the alternative for full account sign-out, but the 'not account deletion' clarification covers that.

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 has zero parameters, so the description doesn't need to explain parameter semantics. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately focuses on behavior rather than parameters.

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 clearly states the specific action ('Sign out / unlink this ChatGPT conversation from Ucode'), the resource affected (the MCP session), and what it is not (not account deletion). It distinguishes itself from the sibling ucode_sign_out by clarifying it only clears the MCP session, not the account.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'Use when the user asks to sign out, log out, disconnect, or switch accounts.' It also implies the alternative (ucode_sign_out) by clarifying this is not account deletion, giving the agent enough context to choose correctly.

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