Clear saved authentication tokens to end the current session. The next API call will require login, ensuring secure access.
Clear saved auth tokens. Next call will require login.
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": "logout"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently states that it clears saved auth tokens and that subsequent calls will need login, which are the key behavioral effects. It does not elaborate on edge cases (e.g., calling while already logged out), but the core action is well disclosed.
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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that front-load the primary action and its immediate consequence. Every word contributes to understanding, with no unnecessary detail or repetition.
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 the tool's simplicity, no parameters, and no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know: what the tool does and what to expect afterward. It is complete for the intended usage.
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 input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. Per calibration guidelines, a tool with 0 parameters receives a baseline score of 4, as the description need not elaborate on 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 verb 'Clear' and the resource 'saved auth tokens', making it obvious that this tool logs out the user by removing authentication. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'login' (which would set tokens) and other task-related tools.
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 implies the tool should be used when you want to end the authenticated session, and the consequence ('Next call will require login') clarifies its role as the counterpart to 'login'. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, though the context makes this reasonably clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.