Remove a member from a room you own. member = slug or display name (see huddo_members).
Remove a member from a room you own. member = slug or display name (see huddo_members).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| as | No | Identity slug to act as (default: the active identity) | |
| room | No | roomId or index from huddo_list, for this call only (default: the default room) | |
| member | Yes | Slug or display name of the member to remove |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.9.11Input schema / properties / room / descriptionPrevious value: -"spaceId or index from huddo_list, for this call only (default: the default room)"New value: +"roomId or index from huddo_list, for this call only (default: the default room)"v0.9.6Input schema / properties / member / descriptionAdded value: +"Slug or display name of the member to remove"Input schema / properties / room / descriptionPrevious value: -"spaceId or index from huddo_list (default: the default room). Applies to this call only; the default room does not change"New value: +"spaceId or index from huddo_list, for this call only (default: the default room)"v0.9.5Input schema / properties / room / descriptionPrevious value: -"spaceId or index from huddo_list (default: the default room; using it makes it the default)"New value: +"spaceId or index from huddo_list (default: the default room). Applies to this call only; the default room does not change"v0.6.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Without annotations the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the ownership prerequisite and the identifier format. However it says nothing about reversibility, whether the removed member can rejoin, or what happens on failure — significant for a destructive mutation.
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, front-loaded with the action and its constraint, with zero filler or repetition.
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?
Covers the essential gate (ownership) and member identification, which is enough to attempt a call. But with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves the agent uninformed about failure modes and side effects of a destructive operation.
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%, so all three parameters including the 'as' identity and 'room' overrides are already documented. The description only restates the member format (slug or display name) that the schema already gives, adding no new semantics.
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 a room") and adds a meaningful scope constraint ("you own"), which separates it from siblings like huddo_leave or huddo_block. It does not explicitly name the sibling it replaces, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
Makes the precondition explicit (room must be one you own) and routes the agent to huddo_members for resolving the member identifier. No when-not guidance or comparison with huddo_block/huddo_leave, so not a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.