linear_removeUserFromTeam

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

Annotations indicate non-read-only (readOnlyHint=false) and no destructiveness (destructiveHint=false), but idempotentHint=true. The description simply says 'remove', which implies mutation. The description does not add behavioral context beyond what annotations and schema already provide, such as whether the operation is reversible or requires special permissions.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose.

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?

While schema and annotations provide adequate detail, the description lacks context about usage scenarios and potential side effects. Given the presence of sibling tools with similar operations, the description could be more informative about when to choose this tool.

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%, with detailed descriptions for all three parameters. The description does not add any additional meaning or context beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Remove a user from a team' clearly states the verb and resource, and it distinguishes itself from siblings like 'addUserToTeam' and 'updateTeamMembership'.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as whether it's appropriate to remove a user with active issues or what happens to parent team memberships. The explicit 'alsoLeaveParentTeams' parameter is mentioned in the schema but not in the description.

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