logout

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by specifying exactly what is discarded (pending actions) and what remains (cached course documents stay local until explicitly cleared), which goes beyond the annotation hints and gives useful behavioral context.

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 sentences with no filler. The primary scope (removing logins, closing email, discarding actions) is front-loaded, and the clarifying note about cached documents is placed second. 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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the scope (all logins and email), the consequence (discarding pending actions), and the residual state (local cache remains). It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly, though it could explicitly mention that it is the 'all-at-once' logout compared to siblings.

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 and schema coverage is effectively 100% (no properties). Per the baseline rule, a score of 4 is appropriate since there is no parameter information needed and the description correctly focuses on behavior rather than parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and enumerates the affected resources: saved Brightspace, recording, and My TU Delft logins, plus email access and pending actions. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling logout tools (logout_mytu, logout_mail) that target only one service.

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 clearly implies this is the global logout covering multiple services, providing context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state 'use this instead of logout_mytu/logout_mail', so it lacks explicit exclusion guidance but is still clear.

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