fidelity_logout

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral details. It mentions saving cookies for faster re-login, which is helpful. But it does not discuss potential side effects (e.g., invalidating tokens, effect on pending operations) or whether the tool is idempotent. This is adequate but not rich.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the purpose and benefit concisely. No extraneous words, front-loaded with the core action.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main action and a key side effect (cookies). It could add context about prerequisites (e.g., being logged in) or relationship to fidelity_login, but is fairly complete given low complexity.

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 input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter information, which is appropriate since there are none to describe.

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 explicitly states the tool closes the Fidelity browser session and saves cookies for faster re-login, using a specific verb ('Close') and resource ('Fidelity browser session'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like fidelity_login (opens session) and fidelity_save_session (saves without closing).

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 implies usage when the user wants to end the session, providing clear context. However, it lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools (e.g., fidelity_save_session might be used if only saving cookies without closing). The context is clear but could be more direct.

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