Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

analyticsadmin.properties.customMetrics.archive

Archive a CustomMetric on a Google Analytics property via HTTP POST. Use it to retire a metric definition while keeping it recoverable; returns the API response as JSON.

Instructions

Archives a CustomMetric on a property [HTTP POST] — creates or triggers a change; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the API's response resource as JSON — request body is a JSON GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaArchiveCustomMetricRequest object; pass it via params or whole via body_file Siblings over the same resource: create, get, list, patch.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes[URL path segment] Required. The name of the CustomMetric to archive. Example format: properties/1234/customMetrics/5678
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaArchiveCustomMetricRequest object.
request_bodyNoRequest body of type GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaArchiveCustomMetricRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / body_file / description
      Previous value: -"Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters."New value: +"Read the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters. The body is a JSON GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaArchiveCustomMetricRequest object."
    • addedInput schema / properties / request_body
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Request body of type GoogleAnalyticsAdminV1betaArchiveCustomMetricRequest: pass it via `params` (merged into the built body) or whole via `body_file`.",
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Required. The name of the CustomMetric to archive. Example format: properties/1234/customMetrics/5678"New value: +"[URL path segment] Required. The name of the CustomMetric to archive. Example format: properties/1234/customMetrics/5678"
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / pattern
      Added value: +"^properties/[^/]+/customMetrics/[^/]+$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it declares the HTTP POST verb, that this mutates state, the read-only-profile refusal, and that the API response resource is returned as JSON. It omits whether archiving is reversible or what happens to the metric's historical data, which is the main behavioral gap for a mutation.

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?

The mutation and its safety-profile constraint are front-loaded ahead of the mechanical body details, which is the right ordering. It runs long as a single sentence chain and repeats the archive request body type in both `params`/`body_file` and `request_body` framing, costing a little density.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers verb, refusal condition, body transport, and sibling set. For a 6-parameter mutation tool with nested body objects, the missing piece is the effect of archiving (reversibility, impact on reporting), which an agent would want before firing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so every parameter including the `name` pattern and body type is already documented in structured form. The description restates the body-passing convention (`params` vs `body_file`) but adds no new semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ("Archives a CustomMetric on a property") and immediately enumerates the sibling operations over the same resource (create, get, list, patch), so an agent can place it in the CRUD family without opening a schema. The required `name` pattern pins the exact resource addressed.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

"Refused under --readonly safety profiles" is a genuine precondition that tells an agent when the call will fail, and listing the sibling operations hints at the family. However, it never says when to choose archive over patch (e.g., retiring a metric) or whether archiving is reversible, so the selection criteria remain implied.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools