Remove bot from meeting

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It is upfront that the action is immediate and that recorded data is preserved, and it names the erase tool for the destructive counterpart. It does not cover permissions or failure behavior, but the key side effect is disclosed.

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?

Two sentences with the core action first and the retention caveat second; every word contributes and 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 one-parameter action with no output schema, the description covers what happens, the active-meeting prerequisite, and the data-retention consequence. It omits only minor details such as error conditions or return shape.

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 bot_id has only a type/required marker, but the description's subject 'the bot' makes the parameter's role inferable. It adds no format, source, or default details, so compensation is partial.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Make the bot leave an active meeting now.' It also differentiates itself from delete_bot_data by explicitly stating 'Recorded data is KEPT,' so an agent can separate removal from deletion.

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?

It specifies the operating context ('an active meeting') and points to delete_bot_data as the alternative when data should be erased. It does not enumerate other siblings or edge cases, so it falls just short of exhaustive routing guidance.

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