Remove contact from campaign

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

Annotations already communicate that this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and that it is idempotent. The description adds the broad scope behavior of removing from all campaigns when campaignId is omitted, which is useful context, but it does not disclose potential side effects or what happens to the contact/campaign relationship beyond the removal.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core action and includes the most important optional behavior. Every phrase earns its place with no redundant filler.

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 mutation tool with annotations covering idempotency and write behavior, the description is adequately complete. It lacks explicit alternative guidance and does not clarify that the contact itself is not deleted, but this is largely covered by the tool name, schema, and sibling context.

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 already documents campaignId and its omission behavior, so the description mostly reinforces that. The description implicitly clarifies that contactId refers to the contact being removed, which helps compensate for the missing contactId description, but it adds little beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a clear verb ('Remove'), a specific resource ('contact'), and the target context ('campaign'), including the important variation of removing from all campaigns when no campaign ID is given. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ghl_add_contact_to_campaign and ghl_remove_contact_from_workflow.

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?

Usage is implied through the verb and resource, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention related tools such as ghl_add_contact_to_campaign or ghl_remove_contact_from_workflow. There is no when-not-to-use or exclusion guidance.

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