ga4_run_funnel_recipe

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly marks the operation as read-only, reveals that it executes one GA4 report per funnel step, and states that the result is simple step counts rather than a modeled funnel with conversion metrics. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema, though it does not discuss rate limits or error behavior.

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 covers safety, tool purpose, execution model, and output shape with no filler. Every phrase contributes information: 'read-only', 'configurable funnel recipe', 'one GA4 report per eventName/pagePath step', and 'simple step counts'.

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 schema supplies parameter detail well, and the description covers the core behavior and output in broad terms. However, there is no output schema and no explicit return structure, and the description does not clarify how step counts relate to each other (e.g., independent counts versus sequential drop-off) beyond the 'one report per step' hint. It is adequate but leaves some contextual gaps for an agent to infer.

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 description adds no parameter-level detail, but the schema already documents six parameters with types, defaults, enums, required markers, and descriptions for the main fields. At roughly 67% schema description coverage, the structured data carries most of the burden; the description's lack of parameter guidance is acceptable but not ideal.

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?

Clearly states a specific verb ('Run'), a specific resource ('a read-only configurable funnel recipe'), the mechanism ('one GA4 report per eventName/pagePath step'), and the output ('simple step counts'). This distinguishes it from generic reporting tools and even hints at the contrast with the advanced funnel 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?

Usage context is implied by the words 'read-only', 'configurable funnel recipe', and 'simple step counts', which suggests this is the simpler alternative to ga4_run_advanced_funnel_report. However, it never explicitly names when to use this tool versus the advanced funnel or standard report tools, and it gives no exclusion criteria.

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