antideploy-mcp

Official

by antideploy

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

JavaScript

Local

Forget the saved login

logout

Destructive

Deletes the saved account token from this machine when the user asks to sign out; it does not revoke the server token or affect ANTIDEPLOY_API_KEY.

Instructions

Delete the account token saved on this machine, only when the user asked to sign out. It does not revoke the token on the server; for that the user opens https://antideploy.com/tokens. A project key in ANTIDEPLOY_API_KEY is not affected.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "logout"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, and the description adds genuinely non-redundant behavior: it is a local-only deletion that leaves the server token valid, and it does not touch a project key in ANTIDEPLOY_API_KEY. That is exactly the context an agent needs to avoid misreporting to the user that they are fully logged out server-side.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information: the action, the gating condition, the server-side caveat with remediation URL, and the unaffected credential. Nothing is wasted and the action leads.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, but the tool takes no parameters and the description fully covers the side effects, the boundaries of the deletion, and the follow-up path. An agent has everything needed to call it and describe the result accurately.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description still adds useful meaning by clarifying that an ANTIDEPLOY_API_KEY environment variable is out of scope, ruling out an input an agent might otherwise assume matters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource (delete the locally saved account token) with explicit narrow scope ('on this machine'), which distinguishes it cleanly from the sibling 'login'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives an explicit when-to-use condition ('only when the user asked to sign out'), names what it does not do (server-side revocation), and points to the alternative path for that case (https://antideploy.com/tokens).

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