glubler_logout

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the mutating nature ('Disconnect') and the concrete side effect of removing saved local credentials, which goes beyond what the tool name alone conveys. It does not detail token revocation or irreversibility, but for a zero-parameter logout the disclosed behavior is substantially transparent.

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, front-loaded sentence states the action and the key side effect with no filler. Every word earns its place, and the structure is optimal for a simple no-parameter tool.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential outcome for the agent: the account becomes disconnected and local credentials are removed. The only minor omission is handling for the already-logged-out case, but that is not critical for correct invocation of a logout 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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter-level meaning the description must add. The baseline of 4 applies because no input semantics are needed, and the description does not introduce any confusing parameter-related claims.

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 ('Disconnect') and names the precise resource ('the authenticated Glubler account'), and adds the distinct side effect of 'remov[ing] saved local credentials.' This clearly separates logout from siblings like glubler_login and glubler_whoami.

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 intended usage is implied: call this when you want to end the authenticated session and clear local credentials. However, it provides no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or comparison with alternatives such as glubler_login or glubler_whoami, so the agent must infer routing from the tool name and context.

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