remove_member

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It reveals important effects: immediate loss of access, persistence of API keys ('keys are org-scoped, not user-scoped'), and the admin role restriction. This goes beyond the input schema.

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 three sentences, each essential. Front-loaded with the primary action, followed by critical behavioral details, and ending with an important constraint. No wasted words.

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 has 2 parameters and an output schema exists, the description covers the main purpose, key side effects, and a constraint. It is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's scope and consequences, though it could briefly mention the 'confirm' parameter's role.

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?

Schema description coverage is 50% (only 'confirm' has a description). The tool description does not add meaning for 'user_id', which remains undocumented. It could clarify the expected format or source of user IDs, but it does not.

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 member from the organization' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like remove_workspace_member (which removes from a workspace only) and update_member_role (which changes role instead).

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?

It explicitly states when NOT to use the tool ('Cannot remove members with the 'admin' role') and directs to an alternative ('that must be done through the Console'). While it doesn't explicitly list other siblings for comparison, the context is clear.

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