remove_member

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses seat freeing for editors, which is helpful, but lacks details on reversibility, notifications, or impact on shared work. The description adds some behavioral context but remains minimal.

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 two sentences, front-loaded, and every word adds value. No redundancy or unnecessary information.

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 simple nature of a removal tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the core action and a key side effect. It is mostly complete, though additional details on side effects or system behavior could improve it.

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%, and the description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides for email and projectId. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 it removes a collaborator from a PinCushion project and specifies a key side effect (freeing a seat for editors). This distinguishes it from siblings like add_member and remove_collaboration_integration.

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 implies usage for removing collaborators but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives or prerequisites, offering only implied context.

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