get_custom_dimensions_and_metrics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Return' implies a read-only lookup and it discloses the returned content (dimensions, metrics, apiName), but it says nothing about authentication/permission needs, empty-result behavior, or possible errors for an invalid property.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, and the core resource is front-loaded before the apiName purpose. Nothing could be trimmed without losing information.

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 simple read tool with one fully documented parameter this is close to adequate, and the mention of apiName hints at the payload. With no output schema, however, the description should at least sketch the shape of the returned dimensions/metrics rather than leaving the agent to guess.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single property_id parameter is fully documented in the schema, including how to find it. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('the property's custom dimensions and metrics') with the added detail that it supplies the apiName for reports. That distinguishes it from siblings like get_property_details or get_account_summaries, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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 phrase 'with the apiName to use in reports' implies the tool is a lookup used to build report requests, which is useful inferred context. There is no explicit when-to-use statement, no exclusion of alternatives, and no guidance on what to do if the property has no custom dimensions.

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