Delete Project Role

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by explaining the immediate effect on user access and the need for confirmation. It also describes the return value. No contradictions with 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 concise, with a clear header, warning, and structured Args/Returns sections. Every sentence adds value.

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?

Given the low complexity and presence of annotations and output schema, the description provides sufficient context. The return value 'Confirmation message' is mildly vague but acceptable for a destructive action.

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 coverage is 100% and the description repeats the parameter info from the schema. It adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 starts with 'Remove a user's role from a specific project', which is a clear verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling deletion tools like delete_env_role and delete_environment by specifying 'project role'.

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 explicitly warns 'Destructive — the user will lose project access immediately' and includes a 'confirmed' parameter requiring explicit user confirmation, providing clear usage guidance. However, it could benefit from mentioning when not to use this tool (e.g., alternatives like set_project_role).

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