remove_role_member

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds a specific edge-case behavior ('Returns removed=false if the member was not on the role'), but does not disclose success return, permission requirements, or error handling for invalid roles.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and immediately followed by a useful edge-case note. No wasted words.

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 simple 3-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description provides the core action and one edge case, but omits what a successful removal returns and any prerequisites or side effects. It is adequate but incomplete.

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 coverage is low (33%, only member has a description). The description adds that 'role' is a security role and that member is identified by identity, but it does not clarify sessionId. It partially compensates for the low schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('member from a security role'), and clarifies the method ('by member identity'). It also includes the return behavior for the not-found case, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_role_member or delete_role.

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 implies usage (removing a member from a role) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are provided, so the context is clear but not fully guided.

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