remove_user_from_permission_group

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, covering the mutation and destructive nature. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as side effects, reversibility, or permission requirements. It neither contradicts annotations nor enriches them.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the workspace_id hint is placed at the end without clutter. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it borders on under-specification.

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 destructive mutation with three required parameters and no parameter descriptions, the description is incomplete. It lacks usage context, alternatives, and sufficient parameter semantics for group_id and user_id. Even with an output schema present, an agent cannot reliably invoke this tool without additional information.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only provides guidance for workspace_id (pointing to list_workspaces()), leaving group_id and user_id completely undocumented in both schema and description. This is a significant gap for two of the three required parameters.

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: 'Remove a user from a permission group.' It names the specific verb and resource, making the purpose obvious. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling add_users_to_permission_group, so it falls 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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of related permission-group operations or any conditions that would favor this tool. The only hint about workspace_id is parameter-related, not usage guidance.

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