Contract Testing: Admin Remove Role from User

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

The annotations already carry the key safety information: destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds only the 'Toolset: Admin' context and the granularity of removing a single role, but it does not describe permissions, reversibility, or behavior when the user does not currently have the role. It is aligned with the annotations and minimally adequate, but not richly transparent.

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 opening action is front-loaded and clear, which is good. However, the description includes a full Parameters section that duplicates the input schema verbatim, making the definition less economical than it should be. It remains short, but not every element earns its place.

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?

For a simple two-parameter admin mutation, the annotated destructive/idempotent hints and fully covered schema provide a reasonable baseline. Still, since there is no output schema, a brief note about the expected outcome, return value, or failure mode would make the tool easier to invoke correctly. The description is minimally sufficient but leaves these gaps.

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?

Both userId and roleId are fully documented in the input schema, which has 100% schema description coverage. The description's parameter list simply repeats the schema text and adds no new constraints, format details, or relationships between the parameters.

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 uses the explicit verb 'Remove' with a specific object—a single role from a user—which clearly states the action. The word 'single' helps distinguish this from bulk role operations like admin_set_user_roles and from the opposite operation admin_add_role_to_user. The admin scope is also reinforced by title and toolset.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over admin_add_role_to_user or admin_set_user_roles, and no prerequisites are stated. The 'Toolset: Admin' label provides some context but does not explain conditions for use or exclusions.

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