organizations_delete_follower

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

With no annotations, the description adequately discloses behavior: after removal, the user stops receiving notifications but retains access if permissions allow. It clarifies the tool only affects notification settings, not access rights. This goes beyond basic description.

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 bullet points and front-loaded with key information. However, it is slightly verbose; some sentences could be condensed without losing meaning.

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?

The tool is simple (delete one entity), and the description covers the effect and use cases. No output schema exists, but the description sufficiently explains the outcome and side effects. It would benefit from mentioning return value (e.g., 'returns success status').

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%, so the description adds minimal value. It restates that 'follower_id' is the user ID, which is already in the schema. A higher score would require additional context like data types or constraints.

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 action (delete a follower from an organization) and explains the consequences. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'organizations_add_follower' and 'organizations_list_followers', though it doesn't explicitly contrast with 'deals_remove_follower'.

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 lists use cases (managing notifications, adjusting team involvement, etc.) but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives like 'organizations_update' or 'deals_remove_follower'. The guidance is implicit.

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