github_teams_remove_member_legacy

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Remove team member' implying a destructive mutation, but provides no details on side effects, required permissions, reversibility, or what 'legacy' means in terms of behavior differences.

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 extremely concise (4 words), which is good for quick recognition but lacks sufficient substance to be truly helpful. It is front-loaded with the key verb and object, but could be slightly expanded for clarity.

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 simplicity of the operation and the presence of siblings, the description is incomplete. It does not address the 'legacy' aspect, alternative endpoints, or any organizational context. An agent would lack critical information for proper tool selection.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% (each parameter described by name), but the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. It does not explain what team_id or username refer to in this context. Baseline is 3 due to high schema coverage.

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 'Remove team member (Legacy)' clearly indicates the action (remove) and resource (team member). The 'Legacy' suffix hints it's an older API, but it does not distinguish from sibling tools like github_teams_remove_membership_for_user_legacy or github_teams_remove_repo_legacy.

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, such as the non-legacy endpoint or other removal tools. The description lacks context on prerequisites, deprecation status, or recommended usage.

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