delete_users_signout

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

Annotations already carry the behavioral safety profile (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false), and the description adds the HTTP DELETE method and endpoint path, which consistently confirm a mutating operation. No commentary is given on what is actually invalidated (current session vs. all devices), token handling, or authentication requirements. The description does not contradict the annotations.

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 definition is very short with no filler, which suits a no-argument action. However, 'Sign Out.' is near-tautological with the tool name delete_users_signout, and only the endpoint line adds real informational value by specifying the HTTP method. It is under-specified rather than efficiently concise.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema and annotations covering the destructive profile, the definition is minimally adequate. The main missing context is scope: whether sign-out applies to the current session across all devices, whether prior authentication is required, and what the response signals about success. Adequate but leaves an agent to infer the operational semantics.

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 the baseline of 4 applies. There is nothing for the description to document, and the schema coverage is trivially complete at 100%. The description correctly omits parameter details that do not exist.

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 'Sign Out.' with a clear verb and resource, reinforced by the explicit endpoint 'DELETE /users/signout'. The action is unambiguous and the inverse sibling create_users_signin makes the intent obvious even without explicit differentiation language. Minor deduction because 'Sign Out' largely restates the tool name rather than adding descriptive depth.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_users_signin (sign in) or create_home_users_by_id_switch (switch user). No conditions, exclusions, or prerequisites are mentioned. An agent gets no help deciding whether sign-out is the right operation for its goal.

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