edubase_delete_organization_permission

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint: true and idempotentHint: true, informing the agent the tool is mutating but safe to retry. The description does not add behavioral context beyond this—it doesn't note, for instance, whether removing a permission cascades to sub-resources or requires specific user roles. With annotations covering the key traits, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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, clear sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately front-loaded and easy to parse. A slightly longer description that included minor usage guidance (e.g., related tools) would still be acceptable, but the current version is lean and effective.

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 tool's simplicity (3 required params, all string, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description is functional but lacks context about the permission removal process (e.g., what happens if the user doesn't have the permission, or if the permission is the last one). The sibling tools for post/get/delete are similar, so the description is minimally adequate but not enriched with situational nuance.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions (user, permission, organization). It does not explain the relationship between parameters or provide examples, but the schema already provides clear enum values for permission and basic descriptions for each field.

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 ('Remove') and the resource ('user permission from an organization'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like edubase_post_organization_permission (which adds a permission) and edubase_get_organization_permission (which retrieves them). The verb and target are specific and unambiguous.

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 clear context by stating the tool removes a permission, but it does not provide guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., it does not mention that to add a permission, one should use edubase_post_organization_permission, or that the permission must already exist). No explicit exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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