ga4_get_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the tool executes a report and details parameter behavior, defaults, and row limit maximum. It does not mention rate limits or handling of invalid dimension/metric names, but the output schema covers return structure, and the read-only nature is self-evident.

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 well-structured with an 'Args' block, clear parameter explanations, and useful examples. Every sentence adds value, and the format is scannable and efficient.

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 tool has an output schema, so return values need no further explanation. The description fully covers parameters, defaults, limits, and the custom-report use case, making it complete for the tool's complexity and context.

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, and it does excellently. It explains every parameter with examples, defaults, and constraints (e.g., 'row_limit max: 100'), adding meaning far beyond the bare schema definitions.

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 a specific verb ('Run') and resource ('custom GA4 report') with the ability to combine dimensions and metrics. It distinguishes itself from specialized sibling tools by emphasizing 'any combination' of dimensions and metrics.

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 implies this is for arbitrary/custom report needs versus the specialized siblings (e.g., top pages, traffic sources, conversions), but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over a sibling. The 'custom' framing makes the use case clear enough.

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