skylight_remove_user

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden, but it only restates the core action. It does not disclose side effects, reversibility, whether the user's account is deleted, or what happens when frameId is omitted.

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?

A single clear sentence with no filler; the action and object are front-loaded. It is appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter tool.

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 description is too thin for an agent to invoke this safely: it leaves unclear whether frameId is required in multi-frame setups, what return or error behavior to expect given no output schema, and what 'removed' means for the user's existing data and access. Given absent annotations and 0% parameter coverage, this is a substantial gap.

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 only loosely maps 'a user' to id and 'the frame' to frameId. It does not explain that id is the user/member identifier, how frameId behaves when optional, or why id can be a string or number.

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 a specific action ('Remove') with a resource and scope ('a user from the frame'), and is clearly distinct from sibling tools like invite_user or approve_user. It is somewhat ambiguous whether 'remove' means revoking frame access versus deleting a user account, but the frame context narrows it enough.

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 instead of alternatives such as skylight_resolve_member, skylight_list_frame_members, or user-management actions. There is no stated prerequisite, such as finding the user id first, and no exclusion, such as not for deleting an account.

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