Meta Council

Assign Leads To Campaign

assign_leads_to_campaign

Assign one or more of the user's existing leads to one of the user's campaigns (both must be owned by the caller). Returns how many were assigned. Idempotent. Requires authentication.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lead_ids`	Yes	Lead ids to assign (from search_outreach_leads).
`campaign_id`	Yes	Target campaign id (from list_outreach_campaigns).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`text`	Yes

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior1/5

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

The description claims the tool is 'Idempotent', but the annotations set idempotentHint=false. This is a direct contradiction, which misleads the AI agent about the tool's behavior. The description does add value by stating the return value and authentication requirement, but the contradiction overrides.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes key facts (return count, idempotency, authentication). No superfluous content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's low complexity (2 params, simple assignment), the description covers usage constraints, return value, and idempotency. The existence of an output schema and good parameter descriptions contribute to completeness, though error conditions are not mentioned.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, and both parameters have clear descriptions referencing source tools. The description adds the ownership constraint ('both must be owned by the caller'), which provides additional meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Assign'), the resources ('leads to campaigns'), and constraints ('both must be owned by the caller'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like create_outreach_campaign or add_outreach_lead by specifying the assignment of existing leads to existing campaigns.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides useful context: leads and campaigns must be owned by the caller, and the operation is idempotent. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like add_outreach_lead or update_outreach_lead_status, leaving some ambiguity.

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

All Meta Council tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Every tool targets a distinct resource and action, with detailed descriptions that clearly separate overlapping domains (e.g., consulting vs. marketing vs. outreach). Even within the same domain, tools like 'create_consulting_deliverable' and 'create_consulting_document_revision' are unambiguous due to their specific nouns.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., 'create_invoice', 'get_deal', 'list_agents'). The few exceptions like 'locus_determine_from_scores' still adhere to the verb_noun structure and do not break the pattern.

Tool Count1/5

With 124 tools, the server is massively over-scoped for typical MCP use. The tool count far exceeds the '50+ extreme mismatch' threshold, making it nearly impossible for an agent to efficiently navigate or select the right tool without extensive context. Even a large platform should consolidate or expose fewer tools.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers CRUD and lifecycle operations across at least 10 domains (sales, consulting, marketing, outreach, accounting, workflows, ticketing, API keys, feedback, platform metrics). Each domain appears to have no obvious gaps—e.g., invoicing includes create, update, send, mark paid, void; ticketing includes create, update, archive, dependencies, batch, scenarios, validation.

Resources

Need Help?