Archive (soft-delete) a signal agent. Stops polling, pauses the linked workflow, disables all watched posts, and clears competitor watch linkage. Data (signals, leads, posts) is preserved for audit. Use campaignstack_list_signal_agents to find agent IDs.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| agentId | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior; the description adds valuable detail by explaining exactly what gets disabled, that it is a soft-delete, and that data is preserved for audit. This goes well beyond the structured 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?
Four ideas packed into three tight sentences with the main action front-loaded. There is no filler, and every sentence contributes either to identifying the behavior, its consequences, or how to obtain the required parameter.
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 description covers the operation, side effects, data preservation, and ID lookup, which is strong for a one-parameter tool. It stops short of stating whether the archive action is reversible or if a new agent must be created to restore functionality, which would be useful context for a destructive operation.
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 provides no description for agentId, but the description compensates by naming the resource as a signal agent and telling the agent where to find valid IDs via campaignstack_list_signal_agents. For a single simple string parameter, this is adequate guidance.
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?
States a precise action: 'Archive (soft-delete) a signal agent.' The side effects listed (stops polling, pauses workflow, disables watched posts, clears competitor linkage) clearly distinguish it from generic delete operations and from pause/resume sibling tools.
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?
Provides clear operational context and explicitly instructs the agent to use campaignstack_list_signal_agents to find valid agent IDs. It does not explicitly name alternatives like pause_signal_agent or state when not to use this tool, but the archiving semantics are clear enough to guide selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Many tools share the same verb prefix (create_, list_, update_, get_) across closely related resources, so pairs like add_lead_to_external_list vs add_lead_to_sequence, create_signal_agent vs create_signal_watch, and approve_review vs approve_content_post can be confused. The descriptions are unusually detailed and cross-referenced, which mitigates but does not eliminate the ambiguity inherent in a 282-tool surface.
Virtually every tool follows the campaignstack_verb_noun snake_case pattern, which is highly predictable. Minor deviations exist: destructive operations mix remove_ and delete_ (remove_lead_list vs delete_campaign), AI generation uses both craft_ and generate_, and the seo_/search_console_ subdomains introduce a second prefix convention.
282 tools is an extreme mismatch by any reasonable standard, exceeding the 50+ threshold by more than 5x. Even for a full B2B outreach platform, this surface is far too large and would be better consolidated into higher-level operations or grouped sub-servers.
The tool surface is impressively comprehensive, covering campaigns, workflows, leads, content, ads, SEO, integrations, billing, and more with CRUD-level depth. Minor gaps remain: no single-ICP getter, no direct pause/delete for search watches, and no explicit delete for ad campaigns (only archive via update).
