analyze_funnel

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

Discloses that the tool computes distinct users per step, conversion, and drop-off, and explains the effect of omitting steps. However, with no annotations and no output schema, the description fails to specify the return format or any authorization/rate limit concerns. The behavioral details provided are useful but incomplete.

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 sentences effectively convey purpose and usage. No unnecessary words; information is front-loaded and well-structured.

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 no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and parameters. However, it lacks details about the return value structure and does not mention prerequisites or limitations, leaving some gaps for a complete understanding.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that omitting steps yields a menu, default product ID is primary, and default window is 30 days. This enhances understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 tool builds a conversion funnel from product events, specifying the verb 'build' and the resource 'conversion funnel'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like analyze_paths by focusing on funnel computation with ordered event steps.

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?

Explicitly describes when to pass steps (to compute funnel) and when to omit them (to get available event names). Also mentions optional parameters and defaults. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from alternative tools like analyze_paths, leaving some ambiguity for similar analysis tasks.

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