remove_project_team_member

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

The description only states the action but does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is idempotent, what happens if the member does not exist, or permission requirements. No annotations compensate.

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 sentence, which is concise and front-loaded. However, it lacks structure such as bullet points or sections, but given its brevity, it is efficient.

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?

The description is too brief to be complete. It fails to mention what the tool returns (though an output schema exists), error conditions, or side effects. A more complete description would add context like permissions or behavior on failure.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds no meaning to the parameters project_id and user_id beyond their titles. It does not explain how to obtain these IDs or any constraints.

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 verb 'Remove' and the resource 'a team member from a project'. It is distinct from sibling tools like add_team_member_to_project, update_project_team_member, and get_project_team_member.

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?

No guidelines are provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like remove_contact_from_project or update_project_team_member. The description does not mention prerequisites or context.

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