logout

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

There are no annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the tool clears session login/account info, but it does not disclose side effects (e.g., invalidation of tokens), irreversibility, or any impact on ongoing operations. The description adds minimal context beyond what the tool name already implies.

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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's function. Every word contributes meaning without unnecessary verbosity, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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, output schema exists), the description is mostly complete. It captures the core action of logging out. However, it slightly under-specifies potential edge behaviors like whether the logout is idempotent or returns any confirmation, but these are not critical for such a straightforward tool.

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, which corresponds to a baseline score of 4 per the rubric. The description doesn't need to explain parameter semantics because there are none. The empty schema fully covers this aspect.

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 '지운다' (clears) and identifies the resource as '세션의 로그인/계정 정보' (the session's login/account information). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'login' and 'session_status', which have different purposes.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool or mention alternatives. However, given the sibling context (login, session_status), the intended usage is fairly obvious: use it to end a session. This is implied rather than directly stated, so it only partially meets the guidance criteria.

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