run_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that metrics/dimensions use GA4 API names and that dates accept relative forms, which is useful. However, it does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what the response format is, or any side effects, making the tool's behavior largely opaque.

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 concise and well-structured: the first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides concrete parameter examples. It avoids filler and front-loads the most critical information, making it easy for an agent to quickly grasp the tool's function.

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 the absence of annotations and output schema, the description fails to cover essential context such as the response structure, pagination behavior, or any limitations. It also does not clarify the difference from 'run_realtime_report', leaving a gap in contextual understanding for tool selection.

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 description adds important meaning for metrics, dimensions, and date formats by specifying GA4 API naming conventions and relative date syntax. However, it does not explain 'property_id' (beyond the schema title) or provide details about the 'limit' parameter. With 0% schema description coverage, the compensation is partial.

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 clearly states it runs a GA4 report with a specific verb and resource. It provides concrete examples of metrics and dimensions, clarifying the scope. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling tool 'run_realtime_report', so there is some ambiguity about whether this is for historical or realtime data.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for GA4 reporting but does not mention when to use 'run_realtime_report' or other sibling tools. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative references.

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