Log out of Telegram

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

Annotations already flag destructive and open-world behavior; the description adds that all local session data is destroyed, network access is required, and re-login is needed to recover. This is useful context beyond the annotations, though it does not detail server-side session invalidation or confirm-flag 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 front-loaded sentences with no filler; destructive scope and reversibility are communicated efficiently. Every sentence adds meaning.

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 one-parameter destructive logout, the description supplies the key operational facts: what is destroyed, network dependency, and irreversibility. The schema handles the confirmation parameter, and no output schema requires return-value explanation.

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 coverage is 100% and the single required confirm parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, such as what happens if confirm is false, so it meets the baseline only.

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 action, 'Log out,' and scope, 'destroy all local Telegram session data,' clearly distinguishing it from auth_start, auth_status, auth_code, and auth_password. An agent can identify this as the session-termination tool without inspecting the schema.

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?

It implies use when ending a session and notes network access and irreversibility, but does not explicitly say when to choose this over auth_status or auth_start, nor does it state when not to use it. Guidance is present but mostly inferred.

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