fidelity_logout

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does add genuinely useful behavior — the saved session remains on disk — which prevents an agent assuming credentials are cleared, but says nothing about resource cleanup, whether re-login is needed, or whether the call is idempotent/safe.

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?

Two short sentences, action first and consequence second, with no filler. An agent can read it in one pass.

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 simple zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool this covers the essentials, but the name/behavior tension ('logout' vs. merely closing a browser with session preserved) leaves the agent unsure whether authentication state changes, which is the core question this tool raises.

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 takes zero parameters and the description adds nothing to invent, so there is no parameter semantics gap. Baseline 4 for a no-param tool.

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?

It says a concrete action — 'close the browser' — and clarifies the session persists, which is more informative than the name 'logout' alone, but that clarification also muddies what the tool actually does: it closes a browser rather than terminating a session. It distinguishes itself only implicitly from siblings such as fidelity_status or fidelity_login.

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 statement of when to call this versus keeping the session open, and no mention of prerequisites or an alternative tool. The 'for the next tool call' phrase hints that closing is safe between calls, but the agent has to infer the usage condition.

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