Create Funnel

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent mutation, and the description confirms that by stating it creates and saves a new funnel. It adds useful validation context such as the 2-step minimum and step type rules, but does not disclose details like duplicate-name handling, returned identifiers, or whether the site must already exist.

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?

Three short sentences, no filler, with the core purpose stated first and the verification tip last. Every sentence contributes actionable information.

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?

For a creation tool with no output schema, the description provides the key invariants, step type semantics, and a verification step via rybbit_list_funnels. It is adequate given the schema covers parameter details, though it could mention what the created funnel resource returns or how duplicates are handled.

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 the input schema already documents siteId, name, steps, and all nested step properties thoroughly. The description adds little beyond restating the 2-step minimum and wildcard support, which the schema also covers, so it stays at the baseline.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create and save a new funnel in Rybbit.' It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling list/update/delete/analyze funnel tools by focusing on creation and by directing the agent to use rybbit_list_funnels afterward.

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 gives clear context and prerequisites: requires a name, at least 2 steps, and defines the two step types. It also advises verifying with rybbit_list_funnels afterward, though it does not explicitly contrast this with batch_create_funnels or state when not to use it.

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