edgegate_remove_member

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses key behavioral traits: immediate access revocation, preservation of pipelines/runs, the last-owner restriction, and role requirement. It also labels the operation as 'Destructive', giving the agent important safety information.

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?

Four concise sentences with no redundancy. The most important information is front-loaded ('Remove a member from this workspace'), followed by critical behavioral details and constraints.

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 a simple two-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: what happens, what remains unchanged, restrictions, and permissions. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool safely.

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 50%; user_id has a detailed description while workspace_id does not. The tool description does not elaborate on parameters, but the schema's user_id description already adds context about the membership row and effects. The description implicitly clarifies workspace_id via 'this workspace'. It adds marginal value beyond the schema.

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 starts with 'Remove a member from this workspace', a specific verb and resource that clearly states the action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'edgegate_invite_member' and 'edgegate_change_member_role' by focusing solely on 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?

Provides clear context: immediate access loss, preservation of pipelines/runs, cannot remove last owner, destructive, and requires owner role. These constraints help an agent decide when this tool is appropriate, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives beyond the implied removal action.

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