auth_logout

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

The description states the effect of the tool (clearing tokens, logging out) clearly. Since no annotations are present, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does not explain whether the clearing is local-only or server-side, but the core side effect is explicit.

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, concise sentence effectively communicates the purpose without extraneous detail. All words contribute value.

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 operation with no parameters and no output schema, this description is appropriately complete. It explains both the mechanism (clearing tokens) and the outcome (logging out).

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 confirms an empty object. Per the rubric, a description for a parameterless tool earns a baseline of 4 since there are no parameter semantics to clarify.

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 tool's function: clearing stored access and refresh tokens to log out. It uses a specific verb ('Clear') and resource ('access and refresh tokens'), making it distinguishable from sibling auth tools like auth_status and auth_verify_otp.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool or how it relates to other auth tools. It doesn't mention prerequisites, expected session state, or alternatives, leaving usage context implicit.

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