ghl_contact_delete_from_workflow

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

The description includes OAuth scopes and endpoint details, adding some value beyond the annotations (which already indicate destructiveness). However, it does not describe side effects, irreversibility, or behavior beyond what the annotations imply, so it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 concise, with only one line for the main purpose and technical details following. It is front-loaded and efficient, though slightly terse.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature and lack of output schema, the description should explain prerequisites (e.g., contact must be in workflow), error conditions, or confirmation. It fails to provide sufficient context for safe and effective use.

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 coverage is 100%, and the description provides no additional meaning for the parameters beyond what the schema already contains. Thus, it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 'Delete Contact from Workflow', which is a specific verb and resource. It directly distinguishes from sibling tools like ghl_contact_add_to_workflow and ghl_contact_delete, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 (e.g., when to remove from workflow vs. delete contact entirely). It lacks context on prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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