pingcode_auth_logoutRemoves locally saved authentication token to log out of PingCode.
清除本地保存的用户态 token（删除 0600 token 文件）。
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": "pingcode_auth_logout"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive action of deleting a token file with permission 0600, which is transparent. It could be improved by noting the effect on the authenticated session, but it is adequately transparent for a logout action.
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 sentence with no wasted word. It is front-loaded with the action verb, making the purpose immediately clear. Every part 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 no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential information. It could be more complete by mentioning that this ends the authenticated session, but it is sufficient for a simple logout operation.
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 no parameters, so the schema already fully defines the interface. The description does not need to add parameter semantics, and it appropriately omits any. Baseline 4 for zero parameters.
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: clearing the locally saved user state token by deleting a specific file (0600 token file). This verb-resource combination is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'pingcode_auth_login' and 'pingcode_auth_status'.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing to be logged in, or that it will end the authenticated session. The context of use is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.