Log Out 8DX Wallet Session

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It discloses the immediate effect (clearing the local session) and explicitly states what it does NOT do (revoke approvals or cancel on-chain permissions), which prevents the agent from assuming broader side effects. It does not mention prerequisites like authentication, but for a simple logout action this is sufficient.

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 short sentences, with the primary action front-loaded in the first sentence and the key non-effect in the second. Every word contributes meaning, with no filler or repetition of the name or title.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains the action and its boundaries, which is enough for an agent to invoke it correctly. The negative statement adds important context about scope, making the tool's intent fully understood.

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 the schema is empty. By rule, baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4. The description correctly focuses on behavior rather than parameters, so it adds no conflicting or redundant 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 uses a specific verb ('Clears') and resource ('current local wallet session'), making the tool's function unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from related wallet operations by stating it does not revoke approvals or cancel on-chain permissions, which differentiates it from siblings like walletconnect_disconnect or approval-related tools.

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 clearly states what the tool does and explicitly excludes a common use case ('does not revoke wallet approvals or cancel on-chain permissions'). This gives the agent a clear sense of when to use it (to clear a local session) and when not to (for revocations), though it does not name a specific alternative tool.

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