Update a funnel

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects, authentication needs, idempotency (though PUT implies it), or error handling. The agent is left to infer behavior from the HTTP method alone.

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 extremely concise (one line), but it includes raw HTTP method and path information that could be considered noise. While not wasteful, it could be restructured to prioritize the action over technical details.

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 the tool's complexity (nested objects in schema, no output schema), the description is far from complete. It does not explain that the funnel is identified by ID, what fields are updatable, or the expected response. Basic context for a CRUD update is missing.

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 0%, but the description adds no explanation of parameters beyond 'Body: application/json'. It fails to compensate for the schema's lack of descriptions for most parameters (though isPrivate has a brief note). The agent must interpret schema structure without semantic aid.

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 action ('Update a funnel') and resource (funnel), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'create_a_funnel' or 'delete_a_funnel'. The inclusion of the HTTP method and path adds specificity, though somewhat technical.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context. The agent receives no guidance on decision-making.

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