deals_remove_participant

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals the destructive nature (removes a participant) and an important limitation (cannot remove primary person). Could include more about side effects or authorization, but overall good.

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 well-structured with sections: purpose, workflow tips, common use cases. It is concise without unnecessary words, though could be slightly more compact.

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 sibling tools and lack of output schema, the description adequately covers the operation, parameters, constraints, and a recommended workflow. It doesn't detail error states but is sufficient for a straightforward removal action.

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% with descriptions, but the description adds extra context: distinguishes deal_participant_id from person_id and advises to get it via list_participants. This adds meaning 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 clearly states 'Remove a participant from a deal' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like deals_add_participant and deals_list_participants.

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 explicit workflow tips: use deals/list_participants first, clarifies that deal_participant_id is not person_id, and states the constraint of not removing the primary person. This helps the agent decide when and how to use the tool.

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