kick_participant

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

With no annotations, the description provides the key behavioral trait that the kicked user can rejoin later, which is critical for safe usage. However, it does not mention other aspects like permission requirements or side effects.

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 immediately conveys the core action and an important behavioral note, with no unnecessary words.

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?

Despite the simple nature of the tool, the lack of parameter explanations makes it incomplete. The description does not fully equip the agent to correctly fill in the required inputs.

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 schema has 2 parameters (chat, user) with 0% description coverage, and the description adds no explanation of what these parameters represent, leaving the agent to guess their meaning.

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 clearly states the action (kick participant) and the resource (group), and distinguishes from 'ban_participant' by noting the user can rejoin later, making it specific and unique.

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 implies that this tool is for temporary removal (user can rejoin), contrasting with 'ban_participant' which likely prevents rejoining, but does not explicitly state when to choose one over the other.

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