Remove Card Member

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false), the description discloses a subtle behavioral trait: Kaiten resolves membership by userId alone, and this tool runs a preflight membership check before deleting. It also states the return value (the removed userId). This is high-value context the annotations do not provide.

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?

Three short sentences with zero filler: purpose leads, the warning is front-loaded, and provenance plus return semantics close it out. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant elaboration.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description is complete: purpose, preflight behavior, parameter provenance, and return value are all covered. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% — both parameters already document their types, constraints, and expected sources ('Card ID (from kaiten_search_cards)', 'User ID (from kaiten_list_card_members)'). The description merely restates that provenance without adding new meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 — 'Detach a user from a card' — which clearly distinguishes this from siblings like kaiten_add_card_member (the inverse operation) and kaiten_list_card_members (the read counterpart). The warning reinforces the scope by stating exactly what action is performed.

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 description gives explicit provenance for both parameters ('cardId from kaiten_search_cards; userId from kaiten_list_card_members'), telling the agent how to prepare the call. It stops short of explicitly contrasting this with kaiten_add_card_member or stating when not to use it, so it lacks a full when/when-not routing statement.

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