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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered elsewhere. The description usefully discloses that results include steps and step filters and names the underlying endpoint (GET /api/v1/funnel). It says nothing about pagination, result caps, or ordering, which matters for a list endpoint.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, followed by the routing hint. Little waste. The trailing raw endpoint string 'GET /api/v1/funnel' is the weakest element and contributes little to agent decision-making.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing the return shape and does so at a summary level (funnels plus their steps and step filters). For a simple two-parameter read-only listing that is largely sufficient, though depth of the nested step payload is left unspecified.

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 domain_id and search are fully documented in the schema (including the 'contains this text' matching semantics), which sets the baseline at 3. The description implies dashboard scoping ('defined for a dashboard') but adds no syntax 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?

Names the resource (the funnels defined for a dashboard) and adds distinguishing scope: the listing includes each funnel's steps and step filters. That detail separates it from sibling list tools and from pirsch_get_funnel. It never states a verb, though the name 'List funnels' supplies 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?

Gives an explicit handoff: take a funnel id from this listing and pass it to pirsch_get_funnel. That is real routing guidance between two closely related siblings. It stops short of saying when not to use it (e.g. if you already have the id) or how results behave.

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