Funnel Step Sessions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows it's safe. The description adds no further behavioral details beyond what the schema (e.g., mode parameter) provides. It does not mention pagination behavior, rate limits, or authorization requirements.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no extraneous information. Every word is valuable.

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 complexity (12 parameters) and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain the return format (e.g., list of session objects with IDs or details). While the schema documents inputs well, the absence of output info leaves the agent guessing about the response structure.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond the parameter descriptions in the schema. It rephrases the mode parameter but offers no new insight.

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 it retrieves sessions for a specific funnel step, with the ability to filter by reached or dropped. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like rybbit_analyze_funnel and rybbit_get_goal_sessions by focusing on individual step drilling.

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 explicitly says it's useful for drilling into user drop-off at a particular step, providing clear use-case context. It does not list exclusions or alternatives, but the sibling names and schema parameters (steps, stepNumber) imply when to use it vs. other funnel tools.

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