openpanel_compare_funnels

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

No annotations provided, and description fails to disclose idempotency, side effects, or output format. 'Compare' implies read-only analytics behavior but does not confirm safety, rate limits, or whether results are real-time vs cached.

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?

Single sentence is appropriately brief, but '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata leakage rather than descriptive content. Front-loaded structure is adequate but insufficient for the 4-parameter complexity.

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?

Tool has 4 parameters with 0% schema coverage and no output schema. Description lacks return value documentation, parameter details, and behavioral constraints. Minimum viable descriptions for tools of this richness should include parameter semantics and output guidance.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, description must carry full parameter documentation burden. It only hints at 'funnel_ids' through 'multiple funnels' but provides no semantics for 'site', 'project_id', or 'date_range' format (e.g., '30d' default is undocumented in description).

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?

States specific action (compare), metric (conversion rates), and scope (multiple funnels). The phrase 'between multiple funnels' provides implicit differentiation from sibling tools like openpanel_get_funnel_conversion (single funnel) and openpanel_get_funnel (funnel metadata), though explicit contrast is absent.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus openpanel_get_funnel_conversion or openpanel_list_funnels. No mention of prerequisites (e.g., requiring existing funnels) or when comparison is appropriate versus viewing individual funnel data.

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