logout

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

The description discloses the key behavioral effect: invalidating tokens. With only openWorldHint annotation (which does not cover side effects), the description takes the burden and informs about session termination. It does not detail that tokens become unusable or that subsequent calls fail, but 'invalidate' implies this.

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 conveys the complete action without any filler. It is front-loaded and every word 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context. It clearly states the purpose and side effect, so an agent can select and invoke it correctly without additional information.

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 schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously true). The baseline score of 4 applies since there is no parameter information needed; the description adds no parameter semantics because there are none to explain.

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 clearly states the action: ending the Angel One SmartAPI session and invalidating tokens. It uses a specific verb ('End') and resource ('session') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like login.

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 purpose implicitly conveys when to use it — when you need to terminate the session. However, it does not explicitly mention that this should be used after completing all API operations or that it will require re-authentication, but the context is clear.

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