Remove Role From Project

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by emphasizing 'This cannot be undone' (reinforcing destructiveness) and stating the response returns the removed Role UUID. It also provides the API endpoint and product area, which are additional behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 reasonably concise but contains unnecessary repetition: 'Permanently removes the specified Resource Planning records' and 'This cannot be undone' are each stated twice. The core action is front-loaded in the first sentence, which is good, but the redundancy detracts from 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?

For a simple deletion tool with 3 required parameters, the description covers the purpose, return value, irreversibility, and API endpoint. It does not mention authorization or error cases, but the annotations and schema are robust. The product area and endpoint details add completeness beyond minimal requirements.

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 100% coverage, with each parameter already described. The description lists the required parameters but adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. The endpoint pattern is mentioned, but schema descriptions already indicate they are URL path parameters. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 Person from a Role in a Project.' It specifies the verb (remove), resource (person from role in project), and distinguishes itself from the sibling 'add_role_to_project' by being its inverse. The return value (removed Role UUID) is also mentioned, adding 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 says 'Use this to permanently delete the specified Resource Planning records' and emphasizes irreversibility, providing clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternatives (e.g., deactivation), which would help differentiate from other removal methods.

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