Google Analytics 4 by Get MCP Ads

ga4 check compatibility

ga4_check_compatibility

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check which GA4 dimensions and metrics are compatible for a report selection. Queries the Data API to validate combinations and avoid errors.

Instructions

Ask the official GA4 Data API which dimensions and metrics are compatible with a proposed Core report selection.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`metrics`	No	Native or documented calculated metric names to request. Check compatibility with the selected dimensions.
`dimensions`	No	Native reporting dimensions. Validate compatibility with the selected metrics.
`propertyId`	Yes	Numeric GA4 property ID or properties/{id}.
`metricFilter`	No	Native GA4 FilterExpression JSON.
`dimensionFilter`	No	Native GA4 FilterExpression JSON.
`compatibilityFilter`	No	Limit compatibility results to the requested GA4 compatibility category.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes	Original tool result: parsed JSON when the text is JSON, otherwise the text or multiple MCP content blocks. Provider fields depend on the selected query.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedv2.1.1Oct 30, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
addedInput schema / properties / dimensionFilter / propertyNames
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
removedInput schema / properties / metricFilter / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/properties/dimensionFilter"
```
addedInput schema / properties / metricFilter / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +{}
```
addedInput schema / properties / metricFilter / propertyNames
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / metricFilter / type
```
Added value: +"object"
```

changedOutput schema / properties / result / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "properties": {},
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "items": {},
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": {},
+    "properties": {},
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "items": {},
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

First observedv2.0.1Sep 23, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description's one added signal is that the answer comes from the 'official GA4 Data API' (an authoritative server-side check rather than local validation), but it says nothing about quota cost, failure modes, or what an incompatible result looks like.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler and no redundant restatement of the title. Efficient, though terse enough that it forgoes any opportunity to add routing context.

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?

Output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not needed, and the schema documents all six parameters. However, with nested filter objects and a compatibilityFilter that materially changes the result, the description leaves an agent without guidance on intended workflow or on how it differs from ga4_validate_query.

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%, including the maxItems caps, numeric/properties/{id} ID format, and the compatibilityFilter enum, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what is already structured, which is the baseline case.

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 ('Ask the official GA4 Data API which dimensions and metrics are compatible') with clear scope: a pre-flight compatibility check on a proposed report selection. It is distinguishable from report-running siblings, though the overlap with ga4_validate_query is left implicit.

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?

The phrase 'proposed Core report selection' implies this is used before running a report, but no explicit when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance or named alternative (e.g. ga4_validate_query) is given. Usage must be inferred from the prepositional phrase.

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