Sign Out of Provider

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description adds value by detailing the side effects: opens browser, navigates, waits, closes, and forces re-authentication. This goes beyond the annotation by specifying the sequence and the case of missing logout URL, but could mention if cookies are cleared.

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 concise and well-structured: it starts with the core action, then lists steps and special cases, and ends with parameter docs. Every sentence adds necessary detail without redundancy.

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 complexity (browser automation) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the main behaviors: session invalidation, browser operations, and fallback for missing logout URL. It could be slightly more complete by describing what happens to existing browser state, but overall it provides sufficient 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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: account_id is the account to sign out, and provider is an override that defaults to the account's provider. This adds essential meaning beyond the schema's type information.

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 tool's purpose: signing an account out of a provider by invalidating the session server-side. The detailed steps (opening browser, navigating to sign-out URL, waiting, closing) and handling of missing logout_url further clarify its function. While siblings like gv_logout exist, the description is specific enough to distinguish its action.

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 explains what happens after sign-out ('account must sign in again before any browser tools work') and handles a special case (no logout_url), providing implicit context. However, it does not explicitly tell when to use this tool over alternatives like gv_logout, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites.

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