Log out another session

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: the bulk all=true mode, and the guardrail that it refuses to revoke the server's own session. It does not say whether revocation is reversible or requires re-authentication on the other device.

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?

Three short sentences, each carrying distinct information, with the primary action stated first and the guardrail last. No filler.

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 description covers the action, the parameter sources, the bulk mode, and the safety refusal. Only irreversibility and the result of a partial failure are left unstated.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and does explain both parameters: hash identifies one session and originates from telegram_list_sessions, while all=true revokes everything except the current session. It does not clarify the hash format or the interaction when both are supplied, which is a minor gap.

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 (revoke) and resource (session), and immediately distinguishes itself from telegram_list_sessions by naming it as the source of the hash. The all=true variant and the self-session refusal make the scope unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: get the hash from telegram_list_sessions, or pass all=true for a bulk revoke. It also states the one case where the tool will not act (the session running this server). It lacks a broader 'do not use this when...' framing, but the key selection logic is present.

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