logout

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action without explaining side effects such as token invalidation, whether it affects all sessions, or if it is permanent. This lack of detail leaves an agent uncertain about the consequences.

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 a single, clear clause with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple, parameterless action, though it could benefit from a sentence about behavior or usage context without becoming verbose.

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 simple logout action with no parameters or output schema, the description provides the essential action but lacks context about the result (e.g., does it invalidate tokens? clear local state?). It is sufficient for basic invocation but leaves some behavioral ambiguity.

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 schema fully covers them (100% coverage). The description correctly adds no parameter information because none exist, meeting the baseline of 4 for 0-parameter tools.

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 ('Log out') and the resource ('Microsoft account'), making the primary purpose unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'remove-account' or 'login', but the verb and resource are specific enough that the intent is clear.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'remove-account' or 'login'. It does not mention context like ending a session before switching accounts, nor does it explain differences from related sibling tools.

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