ga4_run_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It provides useful context on GA4 API naming conventions and relative date syntax, but does not mention potential quirks like result limits (though the schema has a default), data freshness, or that an invalid property ID will error. It is a read-only operation, but that is not stated.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and no wasted words. Every sentence provides value: the first defines the tool, the second gives naming/date conventions.

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 description covers the core aspects (dimensions, metrics, date range) and key conventions. The schema fully documents all 9 parameters, including filters and propertyId. An output schema is absent, so no return-value explanation is expected. Missing a note about the sibling ga4_list_accounts for property discovery, but the schema's propertyId description already covers that.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces parameter semantics by naming example metrics/dimensions and date formats, but adds no extra meaning beyond what is already in the schema property descriptions. The examples are helpful for a user unfamiliar with GA4 API names.

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 the tool's purpose: running a custom GA4 report with dimensions, metrics, and date range. It uses a specific verb ('Run') and resource ('GA4 report'), and the word 'custom' differentiates it from specialized GA4 siblings like ga4_top_pages or ga4_realtime_report.

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 implies usage for custom reporting needs but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the specialized GA4 siblings. It offers no exclusions or alternatives, leaving the agent to infer that this is the general-purpose fallback. This is adequate but not explicit.

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