Skip to main content
Glama

Remove member

remove_member
Destructive

Remove a member from a team. Owners and admins only; the owner cannot be removed. Two steps: the first call returns CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED with a confirmToken; then call again with the SAME arguments plus confirmToken.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "teamId": "<teamId>",
      "memberId": "<memberId>"
    },
    "name": "remove_member"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
teamIdYesTeam ID from list_teams.
memberIdYesThe member's userId from list_members.
confirmTokenNoLeave empty on the first call. Then pass the token from the CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED answer.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing the CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED / confirmToken handshake, permission requirements, and the owner-protection rule. That is exactly the operational context the destructiveHint and idempotentHint flags cannot convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, purpose first, then constraints, then the confirmation flow. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 3-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers preconditions, the confirmation lifecycle, and the failure mode (CONFIRMATION_REQUIRED). Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents teamId, memberId, and confirmToken; the description adds the sequencing rule that the token is only used on the second call with identical arguments, reinforcing usage. No new format or sourcing details beyond what is already there.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Remove a member from a team") with the scope clarified by the ownership constraints. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like leave_team or delete_team, so it falls just short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives concrete preconditions (owners/admins only, the owner cannot be removed) and describes the required two-call sequence, which tells the agent exactly when the call can succeed. It stops short of naming an alternative tool to use instead.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources