Contract Testing: Admin Remove User from Team

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

The description states 'Remove...' which is a mutation, but annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. This direct contradiction misleads about the tool's behavior. The description does not disclose side effects or required permissions.

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 very brief, consisting of a single sentence and a parameter list. It is concise but lacks necessary context. Structure is straightforward.

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 lacks information about side effects, reversibility, required permissions, or consequences. Combined with the annotation contradiction, the tool is inadequately specified for its admin removal function.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description merely repeats the schema descriptions, adding no extra semantic value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action 'Remove a specific user from a team (admin)' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like contract-testing_admin_remove_role_from_user by focusing on team membership removal.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as contract-testing_admin_patch_team_users or other admin tools. No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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