update_campaign
Update an existing campaign's name and description in Little Green Light CRM by specifying the campaign ID.
Instructions
Update an existing campaign details
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| name | No | ||
| description | No |
Update an existing campaign's name and description in Little Green Light CRM by specifying the campaign ID.
Update an existing campaign details
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| name | No | ||
| description | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotency, and non-destructiveness. However, the description adds no behavioral context such as partial update semantics, which is important for a patch-like operation.
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 sentence, making it concise. However, it is too brief and could include more detail without losing efficiency.
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 mutation tool with no output schema and missing parameter descriptions, the description lacks essential details like return value, error conditions, and behavior regarding partial updates.
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 should compensate. It does not explain the parameters (id, name, description) beyond their names, failing to add meaning.
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 clearly states 'Update an existing campaign', which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling campaign tools (create, get, delete, list) and other update 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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/WillHeadlee/Little-Green-Light-MCP-Server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server