remove_guest_from_task

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It states 'Revoke a guest's access' but does not clarify whether the action is reversible, if notifications are sent, or what permissions are required. This lack of detail leaves the agent uninformed about side effects.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that delivers the core purpose and a key condition. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy.

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 removal tool, the description covers the basic action and enterprise scope. However, the absence of output schema and incomplete parameter documentation (guest_id undefined) leaves some gaps. It suffices minimally but could be more comprehensive.

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 50% (task_id and team_id have descriptions; guest_id and custom_task_ids do not). The tool description adds no parameter guidance beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the missing guest_id description. The purpose is implied but not parameter-specific.

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 'Revoke' and the resource 'guest's access to a task', making the action unambiguous. It also includes an enterprise-only condition, which helps distinguish from sibling tools like 'remove_guest_from_folder' or 'remove_guest_from_list'.

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 only mentions 'Enterprise only' as a condition but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'remove_guest' (workspace-level) or 'remove_guest_from_folder' (folder-level). No explicit when/when-not or sibling comparisons are given.

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