Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

analyticsadmin.properties.keyEvents.get

Retrieve a single Google Analytics key event by its resource name to inspect its configuration and return the requested data as JSON.

Instructions

Retrieves a single Key Event [HTTP GET]. Returns the requested resource as JSON — request bodies are built from the typed parameters (typed flags win over the params map), or read whole from body_file Siblings over the same resource: create, delete, list, patch.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes[URL path segment] Required. The resource name of the Key Event to retrieve. Format: properties/{property}/keyEvents/{key_event} Example: "properties/123/keyEvents/456"
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.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNo
customNo
deletableNo
eventNameNo
createTimeNo
defaultValueNo
countingMethodNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / name / description
      Previous value: -"Required. The resource name of the Key Event to retrieve. Format: properties/{property}/keyEvents/{key_event} Example: \"properties/123/keyEvents/456\""New value: +"[URL path segment] Required. The resource name of the Key Event to retrieve. Format: properties/{property}/keyEvents/{key_event} Example: \"properties/123/keyEvents/456\""
    • addedInput schema / properties / name / pattern
      Added value: +"^properties/[^/]+/keyEvents/[^/]+$"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "countingMethod": {
+      "enum": [
+        "COUNTING_METHOD_UNSPECIFIED",
+        "ONCE_PER_EVENT",
+        "ONCE_PER_SESSION"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "createTime": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "custom": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "defaultValue": {
+      "properties": {
+        "currencyCode": {
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "numericValue": {
+          "type": "number"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "deletable": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "eventName": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "name": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses the HTTP GET nature and JSON return, but omits auth/permission requirements and error behavior, and the request-body/body_file discussion is boilerplate that mostly doesn't apply to a read.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

Purpose is front-loaded, but the request-body construction sentence ('typed flags win...', 'body_file') is largely irrelevant to a GET and dilutes the core message. The sibling list is compact and useful.

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

Completeness3/5

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 needn't be explained, and all params are documented. However, for a no-annotation read tool the description leaves auth requirements and the odd body_file/body-building semantics unexplained, making it only adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents name, query, params, dry_run, and body_file. The description adds only the precedence note ('typed flags win over the params map'), which is marginal value over the schema baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retrieves a single Key Event') and acknowledges the sibling set over the same resource (create, delete, list, patch). Clear enough for an agent to distinguish it as the single-resource read, though it doesn't distinguish get from list beyond naming.

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?

Names the sibling operations but never states the condition that selects get over list or the create/patch alternatives. Usage is only implied by 'single' versus the sibling set; no explicit when-to-use or exclusion guidance.

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