DeleteProjectMember

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. '移除' (remove) implies a destructive mutation, but the description doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether this requires admin permissions, if the action is reversible, what happens to the member's data, or error conditions. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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, efficient phrase ('移除工作空间成员') that directly states the tool's purpose with zero wasted words. It is appropriately front-loaded and 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?

For a destructive mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks crucial context such as behavioral details (e.g., permissions, reversibility), usage guidelines, and expected outcomes, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to operate safely and effectively.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for both parameters (ProjectId and UserId). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline score of 3 where the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 '移除工作空间成员' (Remove workspace member) clearly states the action (remove) and target (workspace member), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'RevokeMemberProjectRoles' or 'RemoveEntityFromMetaCollection', which might handle similar removal operations in different contexts.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites, conditions, or compare it to other member/role management tools in the sibling list, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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