Sign out

Does 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 what is removed (saved logins) and what is unaffected (the InPost app), which is valuable context beyond a generic 'logout.' It does not mention edge cases like behavior when no logins exist, but for this tool, the key side effects are adequately 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 two concise sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action ('Sign out and remove saved login(s)') and then adds a single clarifying limitation ('Does not change anything in the InPost app'). Every word earns its place.

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 logout tool with two optional parameters that are fully documented in the schema, the description provides the essential behavioral context: it is device-local and does not alter the app. No output schema exists, but the described behavior is sufficient for correct invocation. There are no significant gaps.

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 already provides full descriptions for both parameters ('Sign out every saved phone number' and 'Phone number to sign out. Omit if using all=true.'), achieving 100% schema description coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 function with specific verbs: 'Sign out and remove saved login(s) from this device.' It also differentiates from sibling tools by emphasizing the device-local scope and that it does not affect the InPost app, making it distinct from login and other operations.

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 for when to use the tool: when you want to sign out from this device only. It explicitly scopes the effect to 'this device' and states what it does not do ('Does not change anything in the InPost app'), which helps avoid misuse. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not-to-use scenarios, though the sibling list makes the intended use obvious.

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