Remove team member

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

With no annotations, the description provides some behavioral context by noting that team membership affects 'work visibility and assignment' and advising confirmation. It does not disclose whether the operation is permanent, reversible, or requires specific permissions, but the caution implies significance.

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 with two sentences: the first states the core action, the second provides important advisory context. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the primary purpose.

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 no annotations or output schema, the description covers the basic action and one behavioral caution. It lacks details on return values, reversibility, or prerequisites, but is adequate for a straightforward parameter schema.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond mentioning UserKey. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Remove a user from a team by their UserKey', specifying the action and identifier. It distinguishes the tool from its sibling 'add_team_members' by implication, but does not explicitly differentiate or mention alternatives.

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 advises confirming with the user before changing membership, indicating appropriate usage context. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_team_members or provide exclusion scenarios.

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