List conversion funnels

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

The readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations already cover the safety profile. The description adds that funnels include 'ordered steps,' but it does not elaborate on the ordering semantics, response shape, or pagination. There is no contradiction with the 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?

The description is a single compact sentence that front-loads the action and object. There is no wasted wording or redundant restatement of the title.

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 simple read-only, single-parameter list tool, the description plus the readOnly and idempotent annotations are nearly sufficient. It clearly states what is returned (funnels and ordered steps). A small gap remains around the exact response format and what 'ordered' means, but nothing essential is missing for selecting and invoking the tool.

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?

The single parameter projectId is fully described in the schema as 'Clarvivo project ID' (100% coverage). The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so it does not need to compensate for missing schema information.

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 the specific verb 'List' and names the resource ('the project's funnels') plus a distinguishing detail ('and ordered steps'). This clearly separates it from siblings like create_funnel and list_projects.

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 usage is implied by the verb and resource: an agent would use this when it needs to view existing funnels and their steps. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or call out exclusions, leaving the guidance implicit rather than direct.

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