logout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and falls short: it does not say whether the session is invalidated server-side, whether credentials/tokens are discarded, whether the call is idempotent or errors when no session exists, or whether it requires a prior `login`. It also never addresses the surprising requirement of a project_id for a logout operation.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero filler. It is arguably too terse rather than too long, so it loses a point only because brevity here comes at the cost of necessary context.

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?

The tool is structurally simple (one required param, no output schema, no nested objects), so little is needed. Still, for a session-mutating call with no annotations, the description should say what the session state becomes afterward and how the project_id scopes the 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the single parameter is technically documented and the baseline of 3 applies. However, the description adds nothing about why a session-wide logout takes a project_id, which is the one semantic point an agent would want clarified.

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 ("End") and resource ("my.st.com session"), so the agent knows exactly what happens. It does not name the `login` sibling as its counterpart, but the action is unambiguous on its own.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer you call this to terminate a session, and `login` is the obvious inverse. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance, no statement about calling it before switching credentials, and no mention of behavior if no session is active.

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