logout_mytu

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

Annotations already disclose destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true; the description adds useful context by naming the local login and login browser as what is removed/canceled. It does not contradict annotations, though potential side effects like token invalidation are not mentioned.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with no filler. The main action is front-loaded and every clause contributes meaning.

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 logout tool with annotations covering the safety profile, the description names the target and operation completely. An agent has enough information to invoke it correctly.

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 the schema is fully covered by an empty properties object. The baseline 4 applies because there is no parameter ambiguity for the description to clarify.

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?

States a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('current account's local My TU Delft login'), plus a second distinct action ('cancel its login browser'). This clearly differentiates it from siblings like logout_mail and the generic logout.

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 phrase 'current account's local My TU Delft login' implies the tool is scoped to My TU Delft local login, but it does not explicitly explain when to choose this over logout, logout_mail, or a server-side logout. Usage is implied rather than directly stated.

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