Patch an existing funnel. Any subset of name/description/steps/conversionWindowMs. Refuses updates on deleted funnels.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | ||
| steps | No | ||
| funnelId | Yes | ||
| description | No | ||
| conversionWindowMs | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already provide idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by disclosing that the tool refuses updates on deleted funnels, a behavioral constraint not captured by annotations. No contradictions.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main action and quickly covering key behavior. Every word adds value with no 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?
Given the tool has 5 parameters, one required, and a nested array (steps), the description is minimal. It covers the updateable fields and a key restriction (deleted funnels), but lacks detail on output, error handling, or validation rules. Annotations fill some gaps, so it's adequate but not rich.
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 0% for top-level properties, so the description must compensate. It only lists field names (name, description, steps, conversionWindowMs) but provides no details on format, constraints, or semantics for any parameter except implicitly through the schema's nested steps description. Lacks guidance on valid values or structure.
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 'Patch an existing funnel', specifying the verb 'patch' and resource 'existing funnel'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_funnel (create new) and delete_funnel (remove).
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 lists updatable fields ('Any subset of name/description/steps/conversionWindowMs') and includes an explicit exclusion: 'Refuses updates on deleted funnels'. It implies partial updates (patch) but doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives like full replacement.
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.
