github_teams_remove_membership_for_user_legacy

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the action. No disclosure of side effects (e.g., what happens to the user's team access), permissions needed, rate limits, or reversibility.

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 sentence and not verbose, but it is overly brief to the point of lacking necessary detail. It is concise but not sufficiently informative.

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?

For a removal action with no output schema, the description fails to convey what happens after removal, whether the operation is reversible, or any dependencies. It is incomplete for an agent to reliably use.

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 schema descriptions are minimal ('team_id', 'username') and the description adds no additional meaning or constraints (e.g., format, scope, or how to find these values).

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 (team membership for a user), and notes it's a legacy version. However, among sibling tools like `github_teams_remove_member_legacy` and `github_teams_remove_membership_for_user_in_org`, the description does not distinguish this from them.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when not to use it, or which scenario is appropriate for this legacy version vs others.

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