toolfunnel_howto

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states that instructions are returned and mentions the system documents itself. It does not mention safety (read-only, no side effects), authentication needs, rate limits, or response format. This minimal disclosure is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose. The first sentence explains what the tool does and lists all topics; the second reinforces the self-documentation aspect. No unnecessary 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?

With one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the topic list adequately. However, it does not mention the return format (e.g., markdown, plain text) or whether the instructions are step-by-step. Still, the tool's purpose is narrow, and the description is mostly sufficient.

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% with a clear enum and description for 'topic'. The description adds value by listing the enum values in a prose sentence, but the schema already describes each option. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema.

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 starts with 'Get self-extension instructions' which clearly states the verb and resource. It then enumerates specific topics (create-tool, add-mcp, add-hook, package, wrap, configure), distinguishing this tool from siblings like toolfunnel_tool_instructions (which likely covers using tools) and toolfunnel_list_tools (listing). The purpose is 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 implies usage when the user wants to extend the system, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., toolfunnel_tool_instructions for using tools). No when-not or exclusions are provided, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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