get_funnel_slow_traces

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral constraints: the hardcoded ORDER BY duration_ms DESC LIMIT 5 with no paging, the pairwise nature of the query, and the return shape including error_traces. This is exactly the kind of non-obvious behavior an agent needs.

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 front-loaded with a one-sentence summary, then organized into Args, Returns, and Note sections. Each sentence adds necessary context; the length is justified by the tool's complexity and the lack of annotations.

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?

The output schema is present (as indicated by context signals), but even without it, the description states the return format (up to 5 rows of trace_id, duration_ms, span_count plus error_traces) and key limitations. Combined with parameter semantics and usage guidance, it is fully contextual for an agent to select and invoke this tool.

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%, but the description defines all 5 parameters with meaningful semantics: funnel_id as UUID, funnel_name as alternative, time_range as relative window ('24h'), and step_start/step_end as 1-based indices with the constraint that they must differ. This fully compensates for the bare schema.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Fetch the slowest traces for one step transition of a funnel.' It clearly differentiates from siblings by positioning itself as the follow-up to get_funnel_analytics, providing trace IDs rather than analytics.

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: 'Use this after get_funnel_analytics shows a drop-off or high latency between two steps.' It also clarifies scope (pairwise transition not whole funnel) and row limits, but does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use it.

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