Soft delete a funnel. The row is retained with status='deleted' and excluded from list/get/compute. Idempotent — calling twice is a no-op. Use if the funnel is obsolete; the record is kept for audit and cannot be undone from MCP.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| funnelId | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds rich behavioral context beyond annotations: soft deletion, status change, exclusion from queries, idempotency, and irreversibility. Annotations only indicate destructive and idempotent hints, so the description significantly enhances understanding.
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 extremely concise (3 sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words.
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?
The description covers the tool's effect, idempotency, and usage context well. However, it does not mention the return value or error handling, and there is no output schema to compensate. Minor gap given the simplicity of a delete operation.
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 input schema has 0% description coverage for the single parameter 'funnelId', and the description does not explain its meaning or format. While the parameter's role is inferable from context, the description should semantically define it, especially given low schema coverage.
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 (soft delete), resource (funnel), and distinguishes it from hard deletion or other operations. It explains the retention and exclusion behavior, 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?
The description explicitly says when to use ('if the funnel is obsolete') and notes that the deletion cannot be undone from MCP. It does not provide explicit alternatives or when not to use, but the guidance is sufficient.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
All tools have clearly distinct purposes. Funnel operations (compute, create, delete, get, list, update) are well-separated from event tools (events_count, recent_events) and pageview tools (pageviews_count, top_pages, top_referrers). Composite snapshots (user_activity, weekly_digest) and utility tools (get_usage, list_projects) are unique.
Naming pattern is inconsistent: some tools use verb_noun (compute_funnel, create_funnel), others noun_verb (events_count, pageviews_count), and some are adjective_noun (recent_events, top_pages) or noun_noun (user_activity, weekly_digest). While readable, the lack of a consistent convention reduces predictability.
15 tools is at the upper boundary of 'well-scoped' but still appropriate for an analytics platform. Each tool serves a necessary function without unnecessary duplication, though a few more could be justified.
The tool set covers core analytics operations: CRUD for funnels, event and pageview counting, top pages/referrers, user and weekly snapshots, and project/usage info. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no session-level detail), but overall it addresses common analytics queries well.
