Logout

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

The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond annotations. Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive, but readOnlyHint=false signals mutation. The description does not elaborate on side effects like token invalidation or whether multiple logouts are 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?

The description is a single sentence that conveys the essential purpose. No wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 logout tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent precisely what the tool does. No additional information is necessary given the tool's simplicity and the sibling context.

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 zero parameters, so there is no need for parameter descriptions. The description does not add parameter info, but schema coverage is 100%. Baseline for zero parameters is 4.

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 (log out) and the resource (current Transkribus session). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like transkribus_auth_login and transkribus_auth_invalidate by specifying 'current session' and using a standard verb.

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 when to use this tool (to end a session). It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but for a simple action, the context is sufficient. Siblings like invalidate might be preferred for specific token invalidation, but the description does not address this.

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