remove_work_item_from_module

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is communicated. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., irreversibility, side effects) but does not contradict the annotations. With annotations present, this is an acceptable baseline.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently states the tool's purpose, making it highly concise.

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 tool is simple, and the annotations plus clear parameter names provide a basic understanding. However, the absence of an output schema, parameter descriptions, and usage guidance leaves some gaps, though the operation is straightforward enough for minimal viability.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters. The parameter names (project_id, module_id, work_item_id) are self-explanatory, but the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, leaving the agent to infer relationships and constraints.

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 'Remove a work item from a module' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'remove_work_item_from_cycle'. It unambiguously states the tool's primary action.

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 'add_work_items_to_module' or 'remove_work_item_from_cycle'. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or recommended use cases.

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