get_funnels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states a read permission is required, implying the tool is read-only, but it does not explicitly confirm that, nor does it add context about rate limits, destructive side effects, or what happens when the permission is missing.

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 short (two sentences) and front-loads the main purpose. While it is concise, it could include more details without being verbose; 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 that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain what the funnel report response contains (e.g., conversion steps, metrics), how funnel steps are defined, or any limitations. The tool likely returns complex data, but the description leaves the agent guessing.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% and parameter descriptions are clear. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly identifies the tool as providing funnel reports (step-by-step conversion) for a site. It specifies the resource (funnels) and action (reports), which is clear. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_timeseries or get_breakdown, but the funnel concept is sufficiently distinct.

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 only mentions a required permission (stats:read) but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_timeseries or get_goals. There is no qualification of typical use cases or exclusions.

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