Выход из кабинета

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does a good job by stating both the server-side effect (session termination) and the local side effect (cookie clearing). It does not mention idempotency or the result of calling logout without an active session, but the primary behavioral traits are transparent.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the key action ('terminates the session') and adds the important side effect of clearing local cookies. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 action, the description covers what happens both server-side and locally, which is sufficient for an agent to understand the operation. It could add a note about requiring an active session, but the lack of parameters and simple semantic scope keep this from being a significant gap.

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)Skip and no input schema properties, so there is nothing for the description to clarify. Per the baseline guidance for 0-parameter tools, a score of 4 is appropriate because no parameter semantics burden exists.

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 'Завершает' (terminates) against a clear resource: the session on the server, and additionally states it clears locally saved cookies. This clearly differentiates it from sibling auth tools like wata_auth_login, wata_auth_status, and wata_auth_verify.

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 intended use is strongly implied by the name, title, and description, but there is no explicit statement of when to call it, any prerequisite that an active session must exist, or a contrast with related auth tools. The tool is simple enough that the omission is not fatal, but guidance is still implicit rather than explicit.

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