remove_project_member

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states that the user loses access while their created content (issues, comments, time entries) remains, which is key side-effect information. It does not mention permissions or reversibility, but the main consequence is well covered.

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 compact and front-loaded with the action. The behavioral note and parameter clarification are both essential and add value without redundancy. No extra fluff.

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 single-parameter removal tool with an output schema, the description covers the purpose, the exact parameter source, and the key behavioral outcome. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 only lists membership_id as an integer without any description (0% coverage). The description compensates fully by explaining it is the 'membership_id' field from list_project_members and adding a critical warning against using the user's ID.

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 opens with 'Remove a member from a project,' using a specific verb and resource that clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_project_members, add_project_member, and update_project_member. It also distinguishes from remove_user_from_group by explicitly targeting project membership.

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 clear context: it removes a member from a project and clarifies that membership_id should come from list_project_members, not the user's ID. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but the operation is straightforward and the parameter guidance is helpful.

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