GA4 MCP Server

get_user_engagement

Retrieve user engagement metrics including engaged sessions, bounce rate, average session duration, and screens per session from a Google Analytics 4 property.

Instructions

Get user engagement metrics (engaged sessions, bounce rate, avg session duration, screens per session)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "propertyId": "<propertyId>",
      "startDate": "<startDate>",
      "endDate": "<endDate>"
    },
    "name": "get_user_engagement"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`endDate`	Yes	End date in YYYY-MM-DD format
`startDate`	Yes	Start date in YYYY-MM-DD format
`propertyId`	Yes	GA4 Property ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 10, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, and description lacks behavioral details such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, data aggregation granularity, or rate limits. The description gives no insight into tool behavior beyond returning a list of metrics.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Description is short and front-loaded with the purpose. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured with a use-case statement.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema or annotations, the description should provide more context about the nature of the metrics, possible date ranges, data freshness, or typical use cases. Currently insufficient for a comprehensive understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema provides full 100% coverage for all three parameters with clear descriptions (dates format, property ID). Description adds no additional semantic value beyond confirming what the tool returns.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states verb 'get' and resource 'user engagement metrics' with specific metrics listed (engaged sessions, bounce rate, etc.). However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_traffic_sources which also return metrics.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_traffic_summary). No context on prerequisites, property setup, or metric interpretations.

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

Deploy Server