ga4_get_bigquery_export_diagnostics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Detect' and 'diagnose' credibly communicate a non-mutating, read-only diagnostic operation, which is meaningful behavioral context. But it doesn't disclose what happens when no export link exists, whether BigQuery-side access is required, or what the result shape 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.

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

A single front-loaded sentence: the verb and resource come first, followed by a compact enumeration of the diagnosis targets. Every clause carries information, with no filler and no repetition of schema contents.

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?

For a diagnostic tool with two fully documented parameters, the enumerated diagnosis dimensions give an agent a solid picture of scope and behavior. Minor gaps remain: no output schema exists to describe return values, and the no-export-link edge case is unaddressed, but the core selection-and-invocation context is well covered.

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 coverage is 100% with both parameters already well documented, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'stream coverage' phrase loosely maps to includeDataStreams' comparison role, adding a light semantic link, but it does not materially extend the parameter documentation already present in 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?

The description names a specific verb-resource pairing: 'Detect GA4 BigQuery export links and diagnose...' and enumerates the exact diagnosis dimensions (export modes, stream coverage, excluded events, dataset location). The explicit 'BigQuery export' scope clearly separates it from sibling audience-diagnostics tools like ga4_get_audience_export_diagnostics and ga4_get_audience_diagnostics.

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?

Usage context is implied: an agent can infer this is the tool for checking GA4 BigQuery export health and configuration, and the name scope differentiates it from audience-related diagnostics. However, the description never explicitly states when to use it, names no alternatives, and gives no exclusions or preconditions.

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