Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• analytics_reportC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention read-only nature, rate limits, authentication needs, or data freshness. Only states it 'gets data', but lacks behavioral context.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Two sentences, no fluff. However, the second sentence adds little value and could be merged or improved. Overall concise but not maximally informative.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With 9 parameters, 4 required, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks guidance on constructing reports, response format, and limitations.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'custom dimensions and metrics' but does not enhance understanding beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it fetches Google Analytics data with custom dimensions and metrics, distinguishing it from sibling tools like realtime_data and quick_insights. However, the claim 'any type of report' is vague and lacks specificity.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description implies it is for comprehensive custom reports but does not mention exclusions or when to choose sibling tools.

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

• quick_insightsC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates read-only analytics, but lacks details on data freshness, caching, permissions, or side effects. The description is insufficient for a mutation-free tool.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence is concise and front-loaded. However, it could include more actionable information without becoming verbose.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With 5 parameters and no output schema, the description should detail return values or pagination. It does not explain what the insights contain, how 'limit' works, or date formats, leaving the agent underinformed.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the tool's description adds no extra meaning. However, it does not harm. Baseline 3 is appropriate as description doesn't compensate but is not needed.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description states verb 'Get' and resource 'predefined analytics insights', implying a read operation for common use cases. It distinguishes from siblings like 'realtime_data' and 'analytics_report' by focusing on predefined reports, but could be more specific about the types of insights.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings or alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or comparison to 'analytics_report' for custom reports.

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

• realtime_dataC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool retrieves data, omitting whether it is read-only, any required authentication, rate limits, or limitations (e.g., data freshness). This is insufficient for safe invocation.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, clear sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded and efficient, though it could be slightly expanded to cover key context without losing conciseness.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given no output schema, the description should explain what data is returned (structure, fields, pagination). It only vaguely mentions 'real-time analytics data for current active users and activity', leaving significant gaps for an agent to understand the output.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies. No enrichment is provided.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool retrieves real-time analytics data for current active users and activity, using the verb 'Get' and specifying the resource. However, it could be more precise about the data source (Google Analytics) and slightly differentiates from siblings like 'analytics_report' which likely covers historical data.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'analytics_report' or 'quick_insights'. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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

• search_metadataC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authorization needs, or side effects. The search behavior is implied but not explicitly stated.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is extremely concise—one sentence that is front-loaded. It could benefit from slightly more detail, but it is not verbose.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  With no output schema and 4 parameters, the description is too brief. It does not explain return values, pagination, or any behavioral specifics, leaving gaps for the agent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it simply restates the search purpose. No additional parameter context provided.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it searches for dimensions or metrics by name or category. It uses a specific verb and resource, but doesn't distinguish from the sibling 'get_metadata' tool.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_metadata'. The description only states the purpose, not the context or exclusions.

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

• get_metadataA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description alone must disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention that the tool is read-only or any permissions needed, leaving the agent without assurance of side effects.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single concise sentence with no wasted words, front-loaded with the key action and resource.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple retrieval tool with two parameters, the description is adequate but not complete. It does not indicate the return format or mention that no output schema exists, which could help the agent plan subsequent steps.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains both parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description 'Get available dimensions and metrics for Google Analytics property' clearly states the verb ('Get') and the resource ('available dimensions and metrics'), which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'realtime_data' and 'analytics_report'.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'search_metadata'. The purpose is implied but no 'when not to use' or context is given.

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