Remove someone from a site's list

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, idempotent=true, and readOnly=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond them with two useful operational facts: access ends within about a minute, and restoring it requires a fresh invitation plus another email. It stops short of stating permission requirements or whether removal affects other data.

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?

Two short sentences, zero filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the consequence detail follows. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations carry the safety profile. The description supplies the irreversibility/timing context an agent needs to warn a user. Minor gap: no mention of required permissions or whether the removal can be undone administratively.

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% and both parameters already point at list_sites and list_people for sourcing values. The description adds only the notion that 'email' is an address and 'site' is a list owner, which is already implicit in the schema. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: 'Takes one address off a site's list.' The 'one address' qualifier distinguishes it from the site-level sibling delete_site and from the bulk nature of invite_people, without the agent needing to open any schema.

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?

Usage is implied (revoking someone's access to a site) and the reversibility caveat hints at when this is appropriate, but the description never names an alternative or an explicit when-not condition. The natural counterpart, invite_people, is not referenced, so routing versus that sibling is left to inference.

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