List Analytics events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful context about the response shape (distinct event names, counts, sorted descending), but discloses no auth requirements, rate limits, or quota behavior beyond linking the API docs. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by return details, and the API references are compact. Slightly redundant since an output schema exists and the return format is described anyway, but overall tight and well-ordered.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain returns (though it does), and all three parameters are fully covered by the schema. The definition gives an agent enough to call the tool correctly; only explicit sibling differentiation is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents property_id and both date range parameters thoroughly (formats, defaults, references to get_account_summaries). The description adds nothing param-specific beyond restating 'the given date range', so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clear specific verb+resource scope: 'List all GA4 events and their volume for the given date range.' It adds what the result represents ('what tracking is configured and active'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like list_key_events or audit_event_coverage, so it stops short of a 5.

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 is implied by 'for the given date range' and the purpose statement, giving the agent enough context to invoke it. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no named alternatives (e.g. list_key_events for conversions), so it is only minimum viable.

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