Bulk revoke members

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds no context about what revocation does to the affected members (access removal? data retention?), whether it requires admin/owner rights, or whether it is reversible. For a bulk mutation on an org, this is a significant transparency gap.

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?

Three words is not wasteful but is severe under-specification rather than conciseness. There is no front-loaded explanation of effect or scope to anchor the call.

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?

A bulk, open-world, mutation tool with four undocumented parameters, no output schema, and a three-word description leaves an agent with essentially nothing to act on. The description is completely inadequate for the tool's complexity.

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 0% and all four parameters (form, org_id, params, json_body) are undocumented and largely untyped, with only org_id required. The description offers no meaning for any of them, leaving an agent unable to construct a valid request.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

Nothing states when to use this versus the many adjacent siblings such as vaultwarden_revoke_member (single), vaultwarden_bulk_delete_member, or vaultwarden_bulk_restore_members. The only implicit signal is the word "bulk," which comes from the name, not from guidance about prerequisites or exclusions.

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