list_properties

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining include_deleted returns soft-deleted (trashed) properties with a 35-day retention window, which materially affects how an agent interprets results.

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?

Front-loaded one-line summary followed by a compact Args block. No wasted sentences, and the format is standard and easy to parse, though the docstring-style Args section is slightly heavier than prose for two simple parameters.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details are not required in the description. Purpose, both parameters, and the trashed-property semantics are covered. The only gap is routing guidance relative to sibling tools, which is minor given the clear verb+resource.

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%, so the description carries the burden and does so adequately: it documents the accepted account_id formats ('123456789' or 'accounts/123456789') and the meaning of include_deleted. Both parameters are covered, though no default value is restated (schema already provides it).

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 and resource ('List the GA4 properties under an account'), which is clear and actionable. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_property (single property) or list_account_summaries (different resource), but the 'under an account' scope distinguishes it reasonably well.

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?

Usage is implied: enumerate properties for a given account. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or named alternative (e.g., get_property for a single property, list_account_summaries to find account IDs). An agent must infer the routing from context.

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