update_funnel

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals a critical behavior: omitted steps are removed, which prevents an agent from assuming partial updates are safe. It does not discuss effects of omitting optional fields like scope or strict_order, but the core replace behavior is clearly disclosed.

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 one compact sentence that states the action, the object, and the most important behavioral caveat. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every word contributes value.

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?

For a 6-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is adequate but not complete. It clearly communicates replacement semantics and step removal, but it leaves ambiguity about whether omitting optional fields resets them, and it does not provide guidance on expected response or prerequisites.

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 only 33%, so the description needs to compensate. It adds meaningful semantics for the steps parameter by explaining whole-funnel replacement and step removal. However, it does not clarify the meaning or update behavior of optional parameters like scope and strict_order.

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 operation ('Replace a funnel's definition') and the resource, immediately distinguishing it from create-style tools. It also clarifies the replace semantics by noting that omitted steps are removed, not kept.

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 implies this is for updating an existing funnel and gives a clear instruction to send the whole funnel. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over create_funnel or provide any exclusionary guidance.

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