logout_mail

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description adds valuable context: the session is 'process-local' and 'Saved Outlook drafts remain in your mailbox.' This clarifies what is and isn't destroyed without repeating 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 description is two sentences with no wasted words. The primary action is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence provides a concise, relevant caveat.

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 logout operation, the description fully conveys what action is taken, the scope (process-local), and what is preserved (drafts). No output schema is present, but for a logout action the return value is not essential for correct invocation.

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 fully covers all inputs (100% coverage). The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and no additional parameter semantics are needed.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Close the process-local Microsoft email session.' It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like logout_mytu and logout by naming the Microsoft email session. The second sentence adds clarifying scope about drafts remaining.

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 action itself implies when to use the tool (when closing the email session), but no explicit guidance distinguishes it from alternatives such as logout or logout_mytu. There are no stated exclusions or conditions for selecting this tool over siblings, leaving the choice mostly to inference from the name.

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