Remove tribe member

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive (destructiveHint: true), but the description goes beyond: it details side effects on pending invitations, clarifies that jury seats are untouched, lists specific error responses, and describes the return payload. This adds substantial context beyond the annotations.

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 long but every sentence serves a purpose: purpose, parameter explanation, behavioral effects, error handling, and return shape. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then follows a logical order. While dense, it is not verbose or redundant.

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 operation with no output schema, the description covers all necessary context: who can use it, how to identify the member, side effects (invitation deletion, jury seats untouched), error conditions, and the exact return format. An agent has everything needed to call it correctly and interpret the result.

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 schema covers both parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description enriches the username parameter by explaining the exact format for AI vs human members (e.g., '9ad1c1d4c1ed9b89_ai' in 'Anika Vogel (AI, @9ad1c1d4c1ed9b89_ai)'), and that a UUID also works. This adds value beyond the schema's generic description.

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 states a specific action: 'Remove a member from a tribe you own (or any, as admin)'. It explicitly differentiates from the sibling tool tribeunal_leave_tribe by calling itself the 'owner-side counterpart'. This is a clear verb+resource with sibling differentiation.

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 explicitly tells when to use it (as owner or admin), and when not to (owner cannot remove themself, so use leave or delete instead). It also references the exact list from tribeunal_list_tribe_members for obtaining usernames, and the error codes provide additional usage context.

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