Remove a user from a group

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotations already convey. It does not explain what happens to the user's group memberships, whether the operation is reversible, or if any side effects occur. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'takes out' aligns with a mutation, but no extra transparency is provided.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) and free of fluff, which is good, but it is under-specified and uses vague wording ('someone', 'a team') that could confuse. It sacrifices clarity for brevity, so it earns a mid-range score.

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?

Given the tool is a mutation with no output schema, the description should at least clarify the scope (e.g., user group vs. team) and any relevant side effects. The description is too vague for an agent to fully understand when and how to use this tool, especially with sibling tools like clockify_add_user_to_group and clockify_remove_user nearby.

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 covers all three parameters with descriptions, including the workspace_id fallback behavior. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning; the schema does the heavy lifting, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the action ('Takes someone out') and the resource ('a team'), but uses informal language and 'team' instead of the more precise 'group' found in the tool name and title. It does not differentiate from closely related sibling tools such as clockify_remove_user or clockify_add_user_to_group.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives like clockify_remove_user (workspace removal) or clockify_delete_user_group (group deletion). The description provides no context on prerequisites, such as requiring a group_id and user_id, or scenarios where this operation is appropriate.

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