calls_participants_remove

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Register participants removed', which is insufficient. It does not indicate whether the action is destructive, reversible, or what side effects occur (e.g., notification to participants).

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 extremely concise (one sentence) but at the cost of clarity and completeness. It lacks front-loaded critical information and does not earn its brevity.

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 presence of an output schema and no annotations, the description adds no value. It fails to explain return values, error conditions, or the effect of the operation, leaving the agent without crucial context.

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 0% and the description adds no param info. The 'id' and 'users' parameters are unexplained; it's unclear what format users should take or what the id refers to.

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 uses the verb 'Register' which is vague and not aligned with the tool name 'remove'. It suggests logging or recording removal rather than performing the action, causing ambiguity about what the tool actually does.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like calls_participants_add or calls_end. There is no context about prerequisites or call state requirements.

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