Remove Team Member

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds a genuinely useful runtime prerequisite (TEAM_DB_PATH) but omits the important side-effect question for a destructive membership operation — whether the removed author's entries, aliases, or links are affected.

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 short sentences with no filler, and the action statement is front-loaded ahead of the prerequisite. Nothing could be cut without losing 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?

An output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so return values and reversibility needn't be spelled out. However, for a destructive removal the description gives no indication of what is destroyed beyond membership itself, which is the key missing context for an agent deciding whether to call 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 description coverage is 100%, so both 'author' and 'workspace_id' are already documented in the schema, including the workspace isolation caveat. The description adds no syntax, format, or validation detail beyond that, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove a member from the team'), which cleanly distinguishes it from the adjacent team_add_member and team_update_member_role. It doesn't explicitly name those siblings, so an agent must infer the boundary, but the verb makes it unambiguous.

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?

Only 'Requires TEAM_DB_PATH' is given, which is a prerequisite rather than usage guidance. There is no statement of when to choose this over team_update_member_role or team_consolidate_authors, nor what happens when the author isn't currently a member.

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