yoto_logout

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's 'Delete' aligns with that. The description adds useful context by clarifying it only affects a local record and does not call a remote API, which is valuable behavioral information beyond the annotations. However, it doesn't disclose whether this invalidates any session state or affects other local data.

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 with no wasted words. The key behavioral fact (local only, no remote API) is front-loaded and clearly stated.

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, no-output-schema tool, the description is nearly complete. It clearly states the action and the local-only scope. The only minor gap is not explaining what happens after logout (e.g., whether the user must re-authenticate) or how this relates to sibling auth tools, but this is a minor omission given the tool's simplicity.

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 schema is trivially complete. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed. Baseline 4 for zero params is appropriate.

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 action ('Delete the local Yoto token record') and the resource ('local Yoto token record'). It distinguishes itself from remote API calls, which helps differentiate it from sibling auth tools. However, it doesn't explicitly name a sibling alternative, so it doesn't fully distinguish from all siblings.

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 implies this is for local logout/session cleanup and explicitly notes it does not call a remote API, which gives some context. However, it doesn't state when to use this vs yoto_auth_start or yoto_auth_status, nor does it mention any prerequisites or side effects like whether the user must be authenticated first.

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