get_account_summariesRetrieve summaries of your Google Analytics accounts and properties. Identify all accessible accounts and properties to manage GA4 data efficiently.
Retrieves information about the user's Google Analytics accounts and properties.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only implies a read-only operation via 'Retrieves' but does not mention permissions, pagination, rate limits, or any side effects. This is minimal disclosure for a tool that likely fetches a list of accounts and properties.
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 a single sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and clearly states the resource. It is appropriately concise for a tool with no parameters and no complex logic.
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 the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists (which likely describes the returned summary structure), the description is largely complete for its purpose. It clearly identifies the domain (Google Analytics accounts and properties). A slight gap is that 'summaries' is vague, but the output schema should resolve this. Overall, adequate for a simple read-only listing 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?
The tool has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is 100% vacuously. According to the rubric, a 0-parameter tool receives a baseline score of 4. The description does not need to explain parameters, and it appropriately omits any parameter details.
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 states a specific verb ('Retrieves') and a clear resource ('the user's Google Analytics accounts and properties'). It is not a tautology and conveys the primary function. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like get_property_details, which also deals with properties, leaving some ambiguity about the scope of 'summaries'.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any distinguishing conditions, such as when to use get_property_details for a single property instead. This is a clear gap for an agent trying to select the appropriate tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.