github_remove_org_member

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and adds meaningful behavioral disclosure: it notes that removing a member also removes them from all teams and revokes repository access. This goes beyond the bare action but does not cover permissions, reversibility, or error cases.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main action, followed by a single sentence on important side effects and a clear Args section. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 low complexity (one parameter, expected mutation behavior) and presence of an output schema, the description provides sufficient context by stating the action and key side effects. It does not explain return values, which is acceptable because an output schema exists, and the tool is simple enough that the description covers essential 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 has no descriptions for parameters, so the description compensates by explaining 'username: The GitHub handle of the user to remove.' This clarifies the meaning and format but is still minimal, adding little beyond what the parameter name and context imply.

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 with a specific verb and resource: 'Remove a user from the organization.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly targeting removal of an existing member rather than listing, getting, setting membership, or managing invitations.

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 implies the tool is for removing existing members by detailing side effects, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like canceling an invitation or setting membership. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided, leaving the usage context only implied.

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