logout_browser_session

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the key scope distinction (local encrypted storage vs. provider security settings), which is genuinely useful. However, it does not say whether the deletion is irreversible, whether active tokens/credentials are invalidated, or whether the user must re-authenticate afterwards.

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?

Two short sentences, zero waste, with the action stated first and the important scope caveat immediately after. Nothing needs trimming.

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 single-enum-parameter tool with no output schema, the definition covers the action and its main boundary. The only meaningful gap is post-condition behavior (success indication, need to re-login), which is minor at this complexity.

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?

There is one required parameter with 0% schema description coverage, but its enum (linkedin, naukri) is self-documenting and the description refers to it as "the selected provider's." It adds no further meaning such as what happens if no session exists for that provider.

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 definition pairs a specific verb ("Delete") with a precise resource ("encrypted local browser session") scoped to the selected provider. It is clearly distinguishable from the login siblings (start_browser_login, complete_browser_login) and from provider-side settings.

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 second sentence effectively states a when-not condition: this will not revoke sessions in the provider's security settings, so an agent knows not to rely on it for revocation. It lacks an explicit positive trigger (e.g., "use when the local session is stale or switching accounts") and names no alternative sibling.

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