mcp_logout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the local_only parameter's effect (clear local creds, no server-side revocation) and scope behavior. However, it does not disclose the irreversible nature of the logout or that re-authentication will be required afterward.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and every word adds value. No redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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 has no output schema and no annotations. The description covers the two parameters and their behaviors well. However, it does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., success status) or any prerequisites (e.g., must be logged in). For a simple destructive action, this is slightly under-specified.

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 baseline is 3. The description restates the schema's parameter explanations without adding new meaning. It does not go beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Logout and revoke' and the resource 'current MCP session'. It distinguishes from siblings like mcp_login and mcp_authenticate by specifying termination of the session. The scope variations are also explained.

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?

The description provides clear guidance on when to use each scope value ('all', 'others', 'this') and notes the default behavior. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or state when not to use this tool (e.g., already logged out).

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