remove_work_item_from_cycle

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is known. The description adds no extra context about side effects, reversibility, or that this only removes the association without deleting the work item. No contradiction with annotations, but no added transparency.

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 a single, focused sentence with no wasted words, front-loads the core action. It is appropriately sized for its simplicity, though it could afford a bit more detail without becoming verbose.

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?

No output schema exists and the description gives no information about return values, prerequisites, or effects beyond the removal itself. Critical context is missing, such as clarifying that the work item is not deleted, which is especially important given the destructive hint.

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 coverage is 0% and the description provides no explanation of the three required parameters (project_id, cycle_id, work_item_id). The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description fails to add any semantic value beyond the bare schema, which is insufficient at this low coverage.

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' and the specific resource 'a work item from a cycle,' using a distinct verb and resource that differentiates it from sibling tools like add_work_items_to_cycle and transfer_cycle_work_items.

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 usage for removing a single work item from a cycle, which is distinct from adding or transferring. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or any exclusions, leaving the guidance somewhat implicit.

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