room_admin_remove

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

The annotation destructiveHint: true already flags destructive behavior. The description adds useful context: the removal is 'immediate' and caller must be the room owner. It doesn't describe edge cases, but it meaningfully extends beyond the annotation.

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 clean sentences: the first states the action and object, the second gives the ownership condition and the alternative tool. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words.

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 tool has a single parameter, an output schema, and a destructive annotation. The description covers the operation, the precondition (owner-only), the immediacy, and the alternative for the reverse operation, leaving no major gaps for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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% due to the nested $ref. The description says 'another active agent', which implies target_agent_id must be an active room participant, but it never explicitly names the parameter. With only one required parameter, the intent is inferable, but the description does not fully compensate for the lack of coverage.

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 opens with a specific verb 'Revoke' and identifies the resource as 'the room-admin role' from 'another active agent in the room'. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool room_admin_add, which is explicitly referenced.

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 states the precondition 'Only the room owner can call this' and provides an explicit alternative: 'use room_admin_add instead when granting or restoring that role'. This gives the agent clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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