ga4 run funnel recipe

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description reinforces safety with 'read-only' and adds useful behavioral context: one report per step and simple step counts. It does not go further into rate limits, ordering semantics, or failure behavior, but the annotation coverage lowers the burden.

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 one sentence and front-loads the core purpose ('Run a read-only configurable funnel recipe'). It is economical, though 'read-only' is partially redundant with the annotations.

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 plus a fully documented schema covers the essential call semantics for a moderate-complexity tool, and an output schema exists for return-value structure. However, it does not clarify what 'funnel recipe' means beyond sequential steps, nor does it warn about potential limitations relative to advanced funnel analysis.

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 parameters like propertyId, steps, matchType, metric, startDate, endDate, and datePreset are already documented in the input schema. The description does not add meaningful parameter-level detail beyond echoing 'eventName/pagePath step', so the schema carries the weight, which aligns with the baseline.

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 states a specific verb ('Run') and a specific resource ('configurable funnel recipe'), and adds a meaningful implementation detail: it uses one GA4 report per eventName/pagePath step and returns simple step counts. This makes its purpose reasonably distinct from generic ga4_run_report and hints at a lighter-weight alternative to ga4_run_advanced_funnel_report, though it does not explicitly name a sibling.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as ga4_run_advanced_funnel_report, ga4_run_report, or ga4_validate_query. The phrase 'simple step counts' implies a basic funnel use case, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use conditions are stated.

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