Logout

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description adds critical behavioral details: what is deleted (profile directory), that it is local, that cookies remain valid server-side, and that re-login is required. This fully discloses the side effects and scope of the operation.

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 (three sentences) and well-structured, with the key action front-loaded in the first sentence. Each subsequent sentence adds necessary context: local scope, server-side behavior, and recovery. No wasted words.

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?

Despite being a simple tool, the description fully covers the essential context: what is destroyed, what is preserved, and how to reverse the action. The existence of an output schema and absence of params reduces complexity, but the description still addresses all relevant aspects.

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?

With zero parameters, the schema already provides complete coverage. The description naturally does not add parameter details, but the baseline for zero params is 4, and the description effectively communicates the operation without needing param-specific semantics.

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 states a specific verb ('Wipe') and resource ('persistent browser profile'), clearly indicating the tool's function. It distinguishes itself from siblings by emphasizing the local profile deletion and forced re-login, unlike session_status or session_warmup.

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 gives clear context on when to use the tool (to log out locally) and what it does not do (does not sign out on LinkedIn's side). It also provides a recovery instruction ('Run --login to sign in again'), which serves as an alternative. However, it does not explicitly compare to sibling tools, so a slight deduction.

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