delete_campaign

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral insight. It states permanence, hinting at irreversibility, but lacks details on permissions, side effects (e.g., impact on leads or analytics), error conditions, or confirmation requirements. This is inadequate for a destructive 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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place by conveying essential information without redundancy.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks critical context such as return values (e.g., success/failure indicators), error handling, dependencies on other tools, or safety warnings. This leaves significant gaps for an AI agent to use 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 100%, so the schema already documents the 'campaign_id' parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying the ID targets a campaign for deletion, aligning with but not enhancing the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 the action ('Delete') and resource ('a campaign'), specifying it's permanent. It distinguishes from siblings like 'pause_lead' or 'update_campaign_status' by indicating irreversible removal, but doesn't explicitly contrast with all deletion-related tools like 'delete_lead_from_campaign'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing campaign ID from 'get_campaign' or 'list_campaigns'), exclusions (e.g., not for paused campaigns), or comparisons to similar tools like 'delete_lead_from_campaign'.

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