logout

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so excellently. It discloses that local tokens are deleted, pending logins are cleared, and that Microsoft-side app consent is NOT revoked. It also explains the external follow-up required for full revocation, which is critical behavioral context beyond merely saying 'logout.'

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 two focused sentences with no filler. The main action and side effect are front-loaded, and the important consent-revocation caveat is appended clearly. Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter logout tool, the description is complete. It covers what happens locally, what does not happen on the Microsoft side, and where to go for full revocation. No output schema is present, but none is needed for this action, and no behavioral expectations are left unaddressed.

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 an empty input schema, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. The baseline of 4 is appropriate because no parameter explanation is needed and the description adds no irrelevant parameter detail.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Disconnect Microsoft To Do' and explains the concrete action ('deletes the locally stored tokens (and any pending login)'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling login/login_status tools by describing the local disconnect behavior rather than authentication or status checking.

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 makes the intended use obvious: call this to disconnect the local Microsoft To Do session. It also provides an explicit alternative and condition for when not to rely on this tool: 'to fully revoke, remove the app at account.microsoft.com > Privacy.' This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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