Remove role

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

Annotations only indicate mutability and non-destructiveness. The description adds value by revealing the preflight check that produces user-friendly error messages instead of a generic 403. This is a meaningful behavioral trait beyond what annotations provide. However, it does not cover other behaviors like idempotency or audit logging.

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 two sentences long. The first sentence states the core purpose, and the second adds a key behavioral detail. Every word serves a function, and the structure is front-loaded. 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 tool's simplicity (4 params, no output schema, no nested objects), the description covers the main action and an important behavioral trait. It omits details like default guild behavior and return value, but these are not critical for a straightforward mutation tool. The preflight explanation adds sufficient context for safe 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?

The input schema has 75% description coverage (3 of 4 parameters described). The tool description does not add any meaning beyond the schema—it does not clarify syntax, defaults, or relationships. With moderate schema coverage, the description's lack of param info is acceptable but not exceptional.

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 tool's action: 'Take a role away from a member.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that unambiguously defines the operation, distinguishing it from sibling tools like assign_role (which adds a role) or delete_role (which deletes the role itself).

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 provides a behavioral note about preflighting role hierarchy but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like bulk_update_roles or assign_role. The context is implied by the name, but no direct guidance on when-not-to-use or specific alternatives is given.

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