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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a mutating but non-destructive operation. The description adds that it 'unlinks Ucode from this ChatGPT chat,' which clarifies the exact effect. It does not elaborate on side effects like session invalidation or reversibility, but given the annotation coverage, this is adequate.

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?

The description is two sentences, extremely concise, and front-loads the core purpose and usage. Every word earns its place, and it leverages the sibling reference to avoid repetition.

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 tool with no parameters and an output schema present, the description covers the essential context: what it does, when to call it, and that it is equivalent to ucode_disconnect. It does not describe the return value, but the output schema presumably handles that. The description is sufficient for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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 and schema coverage is 100% (trivially), so there is nothing to explain. The description does not need to add parameter details, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. It correctly avoids inventing any parameter information.

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 action: 'unlinks Ucode from this ChatGPT chat' and ties it to sign out, log out, or disconnect requests. It names a specific verb and resource, and even references the sibling ucode_disconnect to clarify it is the same operation, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly tells when to use the tool: 'Call for sign out, log out, or disconnect requests.' It also mentions it is the same as ucode_disconnect, which provides an alternative reference. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or distinguish between the two tools beyond noting they are equivalent, so it falls just short of a 5.

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