User Group Del Users

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that this is a write operation ('写操作'), which is already implied by '移除成员'. It says nothing about required permissions, reversibility, behavior for non-member users, or failure modes for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is appropriately concise, though exceptionally sparse for a six-parameter write operation.

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 this is a mutation tool with no annotations, six parameters, and no output schema concerns, the description is insufficient. It does not mention authentication needs, side effects, or edge cases (e.g., removing a user not in the group), leaving significant gaps for correct invocation.

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 all six parameters including group, users, host, port, scheme, and profile. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline of 3 when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states a specific verb and resource: '从用户组移除成员' (remove members from user group). This clearly contrasts with sibling tools like user_group_add_users and user_group_set_users, though it does not name those alternatives explicitly. The agent can understand the operation without opening the schema.

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 offers no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and names no alternatives. The parenthetical '（写操作）' signals a state-changing operation but does not explain prerequisites, context, or how to choose between this and user_group_set_users or user_group_add_users.

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