list_saved_funnels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the tool's purpose and usage context well, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it requires authentication, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what happens if no funnels exist. For a read operation with no annotation coverage, it provides basic context but lacks operational details.

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, zero waste. First sentence states purpose, second provides usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place by adding distinct value. Appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 list tool with 2 optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides good purpose and usage context. However, without annotations or output schema, it could better explain what the return format looks like (e.g., list of objects with name/id fields) and any authentication requirements. It's mostly complete but has minor gaps.

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 schema already fully documents both parameters. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. With high schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to.

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 verb ('Get') and resource ('names and IDs of your saved funnels'), and distinguishes from siblings by specifying it's for discovering funnels and retrieving IDs needed for query_funnel_report. It's specific and differentiates from other list/query tools.

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 states when to use: 'Useful for discovering available funnels for analysis and retrieving funnel IDs needed for the query_funnel_report tool.' This provides clear context and names a specific alternative tool (query_funnel_report) for different purposes.

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