ga4_validate_query

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly signals a non-executing validation operation and details the exact checks performed, including specific limit numbers. It does not describe return or error behavior on invalid combinations, but the core safety and non-mutating nature are conveyed.

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?

Two dense sentences, with the primary purpose front-loaded and concrete rules following immediately. Every word adds value; no filler or repetition.

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 is simple and the validation rules are well summarized, but there is no output schema and the description does not explain what the tool returns or how invalid combinations are reported. This leaves a meaningful gap for an agent trying to interpret the result.

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 input schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds useful context about limits (9 dimensions, 10 metrics) and compatibility rules, but does not add format-specific detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly identifies the action: validate a metric/dimension combination before execution. It also specifies concrete checks (max limits, ecommerce rules, compatibility), making the tool's purpose specific. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling ga4_check_compatibility, whose name suggests overlapping functionality.

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 phrase 'BEFORE executing' provides a clear usage context: run this tool prior to executing a report query. It does not, however, state exclusions or route to alternatives like ga4_check_compatibility, so it falls short of a fully explicit usage guide.

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