SEO Analytics MCP

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'break down' which implies a read/analysis operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like whether it's read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, returns paginated results, or what the output contains. For a reporting tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple reporting tool and front-loads the core purpose immediately.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, analytics reporting), no annotations, and an output schema (which relieves the description from explaining return values), the description is incomplete. It covers the basic purpose but lacks parameter guidance and behavioral context, making it minimally adequate but with clear gaps.

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%, so the description must compensate. It mentions no parameters at all—not even hinting at date ranges, property selection, or result limits. With 4 parameters (property_id, start_date, end_date, top_n) completely undocumented in both schema and description, the description adds zero value beyond 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Break down GA4 landing pages by default channel group.' It specifies the verb ('break down'), resource ('GA4 landing pages'), and grouping dimension ('default channel group'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'ga4_landing_pages' or 'ga4_run_report_raw', which prevents a perfect score.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, context for selection among the many GA4/analytics siblings, or exclusions. The agent must infer usage from the purpose alone.

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