demote_admin

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

The description adds the specific behavioral detail that all admin flags are set to False, which goes beyond the annotations' destructiveHint. It clarifies exactly what gets modified, though it doesn't mention permissions or side effects.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, conveying the core action and mechanism efficiently.

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?

The description covers the primary action adequately, and the output schema documents return values. However, it misses usage guidelines and parameter format details, leaving some ambiguity for a two-parameter tool. The annotations fill in the destructive nature, but the overall context is still minimal.

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?

The description does not explain the parameters 'chat' and 'user' at all. Schema coverage is 0%, and while the parameter names are self-explanatory, the anyOf integer/string types are ambiguous (e.g., ID vs username), which the description fails to clarify.

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 clearly states the action: 'Снять права админа' (remove admin rights) and adds the specific mechanism 'all flags to False'. This distinguishes it from siblings like promote_admin and other moderation tools.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ban_participant or restrict_participant. It only states the action without any usage context or exclusions.

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