list_data_streams

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of conveying behavior. It implies a read-only listing operation and adds a non-obvious detail about the stream id format (last path segment of 'name'), which helps the agent understand the output. It doesn't mention pagination or permissions, but for a simple list tool with an output schema, this is adequate.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. The first sentence states the action and resource, the second explains a downstream use case. Every word earns its place, and the key information is front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, output schema present). The description covers the main purpose and the crucial detail about stream id usage. It doesn't explain property_id format or output specifics, but those are partially covered by the parameter name and output schema, so the completeness is high for its complexity.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the 'property_id' parameter at all. The parameter name is self-explanatory to some degree, but the description adds no formatting, type, or source guidance. Given the low coverage, the description should compensate, and it doesn't.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('data streams (web/app) on a GA4 property'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_account_summaries or get_property_details. It also adds a precise note about the stream id being needed for Measurement Protocol secret tools, which further clarifies its purpose.

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 gives clear context on when to use this tool—when you need stream IDs for Measurement Protocol secret tools. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the context is strong enough to guide selection among the listed siblings.

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