remove_member_role

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action but does not mention side effects, error conditions (e.g., role not assigned), or what happens on success/failure. The tool is a mutation, but no safety or permission context is given.

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 with no wasted words. However, it is too brief and sacrifices necessary detail. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool but lacks structure and depth.

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 performs a mutative operation, has no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It does not cover return values, error handling, permissions, or what happens when the role is not found. The tool description adds minimal value beyond the tool name.

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 input schema has 3 fully required parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the tool description does not explain any of them. While parameter names (guild_id, user_id, role_id) are somewhat self-explanatory, the description adds no additional meaning or format details.

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 ('a role from a guild member'). It is specific and directly describes the tool's function. However, it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'add_member_role' explicitly, but the name and verb sufficiently differentiate.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or permissions. It lacks any context about required permissions (e.g., 'Manage Roles') or when removal would fail.

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