remove_from_audience

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states that the contact remains in the workspace and retains other audiences, suppression, and engagement history. It could additionally mention idempotency or behavior if the contact is not in the audience, but the main side-effect boundaries are well covered.

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 sentences, zero filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the crucial distinction from delete_contact is placed immediately after, making the description easy to parse and act on.

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 simple two-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what the operation does, what it preserves, and the key alternative. Nothing essential is missing 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%, so the description must compensate. The action sentence maps 'contact' to contact_id and 'one audience' to audience_id, which gives minimal semantic grounding, but it does not explain ID formats or how to obtain these values. This is adequate but not rich.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Take a contact off one audience') and immediately distinguishes itself from delete_contact. An agent can clearly tell that this operation is scoped to a single audience rather than deleting the contact.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool (removing from one audience) and when not to ('To remove the person entirely use delete_contact'). The contrast between 'leaving a list and being forgotten' gives clear decision guidance.

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