remove_organization_member

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

Annotations already indicate idempotency and non-destructiveness. The description adds context about the return value ('Returns removed: false if the person was not a member') and implies mutability without contradicting annotations. It could further detail side effects, but overall it's transparent.

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?

Three sentences, each adding essential information: purpose, behavioral notes, and parameter nuance. No redundant or unnecessary text.

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's simplicity, full schema coverage, and presence of an output schema (not shown), the description covers purpose, edge cases, and parameter usage adequately. No significant gaps.

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 schema describes both parameters simply as strings that will be trimmed. The description adds value by explaining that organizationId can be a name (with uniqueness constraint) or ID, which aids correct usage. No additional nuance for personIdentifier.

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 'Unlink a person from an organization's members' with a specific verb and resource. It also explicitly says 'Reverses add_organization_member', which clearly distinguishes this tool from its siblings like remove_channel_members or remove_drive_members.

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 context for when to use it (reversing add_organization_member) and notes the requirement for unique organization names. However, it does not explicitly exclude scenarios or mention alternatives beyond the reversal hint.

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