remove_space_role_members

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

Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces idempotency and adds that it preserves other assignments, which is useful behavioral context. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the key action, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.

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 existence of an output schema (not shown but present), the description covers the essential information for selecting and invoking the tool: what it does, how to use parameters, and idempotency. It is complete for its complexity level.

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 100%, baseline 3. The description adds meaning beyond schema by explaining that role can be raw _id or name, and members can be various identifiers. For role, schema only says 'a string that will be trimmed', so description adds significant value.

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 states the verb ('remove'), resource ('members from one role on a typed Huly space'), and key distinctions like preserving other role assignments. It differentiates from siblings (add_space_role_members, remove_space_members, set_space_role_members) by specifying the role-specific removal.

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 explicit guidance on parameter formats: role accepts raw _id or exact role name, members accept UUID/email/display name. It implies when to use (targeted role removal) but does not explicitly state when not to use, though sibling names provide context.

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