Strip admin rights

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint and openWorldHint, which cover repeatability and external effects. The description adds the action but leaves ambiguity about whether 'all admin rights' are scoped to the given peer or global across chats. It doesn't disclose failure behavior or permission requirements, but the annotation coverage partially compensates.

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, straightforward sentence that conveys the core function without any filler. It is front-loaded and every word contributes to the meaning.

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 mutating tool with no output schema and 0% parameter documentation, this description is insufficient. It lacks details about required permissions, the precise scope of 'all admin rights' (per peer vs global), return behavior, and edge cases such as demoting a non-admin. The short description leaves too many critical gaps for an agent to use it reliably.

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 compensate. It mentions 'user' but fails to explain the 'peer' and 'accountId' parameters. An agent would have to infer that 'peer' refers to a chat/channel and 'accountId' to the acting user's account, which is not stated anywhere.

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 specifies the action ('Remove'), the object ('all admin rights'), and the target ('a user'). It unambiguously distinguishes from siblings like promote_admin and restrict_user, making the tool's function immediately obvious.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as restrict_user or demote in different scopes. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., being a group admin) or when not to use it. The usage context is only implied by the tool's name and description.

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