Unassign user from a specific role

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the required permission ('assign_roles'), which is genuinely useful context an agent cannot get from annotations. It omits the two-step confirm/dry_run safeguard, but that is fully documented in the schema.

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?

It is short and front-loads the action, but the second sentence ('Unassigns user from a role specified by its ID') largely restates the first rather than adding information. Minor redundancy keeps it from a 5.

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?

With annotations, a full-coverage schema, and an output schema present, the definition gives enough for correct invocation; the permission note covers the main non-structured gap. The only omission is a hint about the destructive two-step confirmation flow, which the schema already carries.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters (including the confirm/dry_run guardrails) are documented in structured data. The description only echoes that role_id identifies the role, adding no syntax or constraint details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb+resource combination ('Unassign user from a specific role') that an agent can distinguish from siblings like action1_create_role_user and action1_delete_role. However, it does not explicitly name or route away from any alternative, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 implies the use case (removing a role assignment) and adds the required permission 'assign_roles', which is useful pre-call context. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over action1_update_role or how it relates to action1_delete_role, so usage is only implied.

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