ga4_report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that — a hard 1000-row output cap and that offset drives pagination — but says nothing about authorization requirements or rate limits implied by 'autorizado'.

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 sentence with no padding, and the row cap and pagination constraint are stated up front. It is efficient, though extremely terse given the tool's 7 parameters.

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 7-parameter, 4-required tool with no output schema and zero schema description coverage, the description leaves too much unsaid: date formats, metric/dimension naming rules, propertyId format, and response shape are all missing. The line cap and pagination note are not enough to call it complete.

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 0% across 7 parameters, so the description carries the full burden and largely fails it. It clarifies limit and offset semantics only, leaving all four required parameters (propertyId, startDate, endDate, metrics) with no format or meaning guidance in either place.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Consulta relatório GA4'), and adds scope constraints (up to 1000 rows, offset pagination). It does not, however, distinguish this tool from sibling reads such as ga4_admin_read or gtm_read, so the agent must infer the boundary.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the alternative sibling tools. The agent gets an implied 'this retrieves reports' context but nothing that tells it when to pick this over ga4_admin_read.

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