Remove Team Member

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool not only removes the agent but also removes team relations, which is helpful. However, it does not mention whether the operation is reversible, what permissions are required, or any side effects beyond that.

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 brief, consisting of two sentences. It front-loads the core purpose and adds one key detail. However, the typo 'masabbs' could be confusing and slightly undermines conciseness.

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 (two required string parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the basic action but lacks details on output, error handling, or edge cases. It is minimally adequate but could be more complete.

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 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no additional detail about parameters. The schema only gives type and required status, so the agent must infer meaning from parameter names alone, which is insufficient.

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 removes an agent from a team and also removes team relations involving that agent. The purpose is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_team_member and delete_team_relation. However, the typo 'masabbs' slightly reduces clarity.

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 implies when to use this tool (to remove a team member and their relations), but it does not explicitly provide guidance on when to prefer this over delete_team_relation or mention prerequisites. The usage context is implied but not clearly stated.

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