remove_user_from_group

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states only the action ('Remove a user from a group') but does not mention potential side effects, permission requirements, reversibility, failure conditions (e.g., user not in group), or whether the operation is idempotent. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation tool.

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 very brief and front-loaded with the core action. The Args block is slightly redundant with the schema, but it does provide a human-readable label. For a simple two-parameter tool, the conciseness is appropriate, though the Args section could be trimmed without loss.

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 a mutation with no annotations, and though an output schema exists, the description does not explain return values or success/failure behavior. There is no mention of permissions, group implications, or edge cases. The description is complete enough for a trivial demo, but it lacks the contextual coverage expected for a real-world removal operation.

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 already lists group_id and user_id with titles, and the description merely reiterates 'group_id: group ID' and 'user_id: user ID' without adding any constraints, format details, or relationships between parameters. This does not meaningfully compensate for the 0% schema description coverage, as it provides virtually no extra information beyond the property names.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('user from a group'). It is immediately distinguished from siblings like add_user_to_group, get_group, and list_groups. The one-sentence summary is unambiguous and directly tied to the tool name.

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 the complementary add_user_to_group or the read-only get_group. No prerequisites, exclusions, or context about group membership checks are mentioned. Usage is only implied by the verb 'Remove'.

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