Log out a device

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint and non-read-only behavior, but the description adds a distinct irreversibility warning, explains that the device must re-authenticate, and discloses the two-phase confirmation flow with a short-lived token. These details go beyond what the annotations state, and nothing contradicts 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 front-loaded and only a few sentences long, but it repeats "cannot be undone" twice and says "Never deletes the account" after already implying the account remains intact. The redundancy is distractible given the same point is made in consecutive sentences.

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?

The description explains the two-phase confirmation process and the key irreversible consequence, but it leaves the `confirm` parameter unexplained and does not mention whether a preview is returned on the first call. For a destructive, irreversible tool with no output schema, it could usefully state the exact state expected on each of the two calls.

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?

With 67% schema description coverage, the schema already documents `confirm` and `confirmation_token`. The description adds meaningful use-order semantics (first call prepares, second call executes with token), but it does not clarify the role of `confirm`, and `session_id` must still be inferred as the target session. It partially compensates for the undocumented parameter.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: "Revoke one login session (log that device out)". It further clarifies the scope by stating it "Never deletes the account", which distinguishes it from account-level destructive tools in the sibling list.

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?

It gives relevant context by saying the device must sign in again and that the account is not deleted, but it never references sibling tools like nuvio_list_sessions or explicitly says when to use this instead of another session-related tool. The recommendation that this is a device logout is clear, but documented alternatives are missing.

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