teamleader_untag_contact

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It identifies the action as 'remove' (destructive) but does not mention side effects, idempotency, error handling for nonexistent tags or contacts, permissions required, or reversibility. This is a significant gap for a mutating tool.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundant detail. Every word is meaningful and directly conveys the operation. It is optimally concise.

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 operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It does not explain what happens on success (e.g., confirmation, updated contact), failure modes, or whether the operation is idempotent. The schema covers parameters but leaves behavioral context entirely absent.

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 both 'id' and 'tags' are documented in the schema. The description adds only the nuance 'one or more', which is already implied by the array type. The value over the schema is minimal, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Remove') and the resource ('one or more tags from a contact'). It directly contrasts with sibling teamleader_tag_contact (which adds tags) and teamleader_untag_company (which removes from company), so an agent can easily distinguish it.

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 implies usage (to remove tags from a contact) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like teamleader_tag_contact or teamleader_untag_company. No prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions are mentioned, leaving some inference to the agent.

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