get_dark_funnel_coverage

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the BigQuery requirement and classification thresholds (90 days), which is helpful. However, it does not mention side effects, performance impact, or whether it is read-only, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 concise at two sentences, front-loaded with the core classification purpose, and every sentence adds value. No wasted 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?

Given no annotations or output schema, the description covers purpose and use case adequately but lacks parameter details and behavioral transparency. For a tool with 3 parameters and no schema descriptions, more detail on input usage and output expectations would improve completeness.

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 0%, yet the description does not explain the three parameters (account_tier, crm_pipeline_stage, web_presence_status). For instance, it mentions 'target accounts' but doesn't link to account_tier, and the input web_presence_status seems to conflict with the classification output. No guidance on format or enum meanings is provided.

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 tool classifies target accounts by web presence into three specific categories (dark, lapsed, visible), using specific verbs like 'classify' and 'identify'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on web presence classification rather than general account or funnel metrics.

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 provides explicit use cases: identifying invisible accounts in pipeline stages and triggering outreach. It gives context ('in key pipeline stages', 'requires BigQuery mode') but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, though no direct sibling offers this classification.

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