ga4_get_ecommerce_diagnostics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It states 'read-only', which is a genuine safety guarantee, and describes the scope of analysis. However, it does not disclose output format, pagination or limit behavior, or edge cases like missing or incomplete ecommerce events—especially relevant because there is no output schema.

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 sentence with no filler, front-loading the read-only nature and core scope. It efficiently packs several meaningful elements—events, revenue metrics, item-level reporting, and date range—into a compact definition. Not verbose, though the phrase 'coverage diagnostics' remains somewhat abstract.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description omits the result shape and does not explain what the diagnostics will look like. It is sufficient to know that an ecommerce diagnostic is being requested, but not enough for the agent to fully anticipate the output or confidently select this tool over closely related diagnostic siblings.

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?

The schema describes propertyId, startDate, and endDate, but limit and datePreset are undocumented. The description only reinforces the date-range concept and adds no meaning for the undocumented parameters. It does not compensate for the 60% schema description coverage, leaving the agent uncertain about limit behavior and datePreset semantics.

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?

Names the exact resource and scope: 'ecommerce coverage diagnostics' for 'core ecommerce events, revenue metrics, and item-level reporting' over a date range. 'Read-only' also helps the agent understand the nature of the tool. It could more clearly define what 'coverage diagnostics' means, but it is specific enough to distinguish from other GA4 diagnostic tools.

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?

The ecommerce qualifier and listed coverage areas imply the intended use case, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives like audience, BigQuery export, or server-side tagging diagnostics. No named alternatives or exclusions are provided, so the agent must infer routing from sibling names and the description's domain.

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