Log out from the Telegram API to terminate the active session and revoke access.
Disconnect from Telegram API
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "api_logout"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action 'Disconnect' but does not explain effects (e.g., session termination, reversibility, whether login is required, or side effects on other sessions). This is minimal and insufficient for a state-changing operation.
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, direct phrase with no wasted words. It is fully front-loaded and efficient, conveying the core action without redundancy.
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 logout tool, the description is minimally adequate but lacks context about the consequences of disconnecting or how it relates to other logout/login tools. The absence of an output schema also means the description should hint at what happens after the call, which it does not.
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 no parameters, and the schema is trivially 100% covered. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and there is nothing for the description to add about parameter semantics.
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 (disconnect) and the resource (Telegram API), making the purpose understandable. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'telegram_logout', which likely performs the same function, so it misses the opportunity for differentiation.
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?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the similar 'telegram_logout' or other authentication-related siblings. The description simply states the action without context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess which logout tool to invoke.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.