End the dashboard session

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds real value by disclosing the confirm gate and the important fact that there is no server-side dry run — explaining why the preview exists. It falls short of describing the effect on the credential (immediate invalidation, re-auth requirement) or idempotency behavior.

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?

Two sentences, no waste: the operation and endpoint come first, followed by the execution gate and its rationale. Every clause 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 two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the definition covers the safety gate and the preview behavior an agent needs to call it correctly. Minor gaps remain around the effect on the session token and repeated-call behavior, which the annotations do not cover either.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both confirm and idempotencyKey are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces confirm's semantics and adds the 'no server-side dry run' rationale, but says nothing about when to supply idempotencyKey. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('End the dashboard session') plus the underlying endpoint POST /v1/auth/logout, which unambiguously separates it from read-oriented siblings like auth_me. It does not explicitly name auth_switchWorkspace as the contrasting session operation, but the purpose is clear on its own.

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 login-session context implies when to reach for this tool, and the confirm gate implies when the call actually executes. There is no explicit when-to-use versus alternative guidance (e.g., switching workspaces vs terminating the session) and no stated prerequisites or post-logout expectations.

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