ga4 run pivot report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the lower bar applies. The description adds real behavioral detail: native filters/ordering, quota state, support for multiple date ranges, the 250,000-cell ceiling, and the required limit. There is no contradiction with annotations.

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?

One dense sentence front-loads the verb and resource, then lists the most important capabilities and constraints in order. Every clause adds information; there is no filler or repetition of annotation values.

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 nested report schema is complex, but it is fully described and an output schema exists, so the description does not need to enumerate every field. It covers the key behavioral constraints an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly. A small gap is the lack of an explicit pointer to alternatives such as batch pivot reporting or cohort behavior, though those are discoverable from the schema and sibling list.

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 reported at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the 250,000-cell maximum and the explicit-limit requirement, but these are already encoded in the schema's max/min constraints. It does not add meaningfully new parameter-level guidance beyond the schema.

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?

States an explicit verb and resource: 'Run a read-only GA4 Data API pivot report.' The mention of 'pivot report' clearly distinguishes it from siblings like ga4_run_report and ga4_run_realtime_report, while 'native filters, ordering, quota state, multiple date ranges' sharpens the scope. No ambiguity.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool: any pivot-reporting need against GA4 Data API, with native filters and multiple date ranges. It also gives a crucial usage rule—'Every pivot requires an explicit limit'—which directly guides invocation. It stops short of naming alternatives or exclusions, such as when to prefer ga4_batch_run_pivot_reports.

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