github_orgs_remove_membership_for_user

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

No annotations are provided. The description does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether the user is also removed from teams), required permissions, or whether the action is reversible. For a destructive operation, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence. However, it could be restructured to include brief context on usage or behavior without losing conciseness.

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 low tool complexity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks essential context like prerequisites (e.g., admin permissions), side effects, and return value, which would be expected for a mutation tool.

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 100% description coverage, but both parameter descriptions are minimal ('org', 'username'). The tool description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline is 3 since schema already defines them.

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 specifies the verb 'Remove' and the resource 'organization membership for a user'. It is distinct from sibling tools like 'github_orgs_remove_member' which removes the member entirely. However, it does not elaborate on the scope (e.g., whether it removes from all teams).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'github_orgs_remove_member' or 'github_teams_remove_membership_for_user_in_org'. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as required permissions or state of the user.

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