ga4_create_key_event

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only indicates '[WRITE]'. It does not disclose side effects (e.g., overwrite behavior, permission requirements, whether the event must already exist). For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 very concise (one sentence plus example) and front-loads the key action. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity; a slightly expanded description could improve clarity without losing conciseness.

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?

As a write operation with three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description fails to explain the effect on existing key events, the role of propertyId, the meaning of countingMethod, or the expected return value. It is not sufficient for an agent to use confidently.

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 low (33%), with only eventName having a description. The description adds no extra meaning for propertyId or countingMethod (enum). The example only covers eventName, leaving the other parameters underdocumented.

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 action ('mark an event name as a Key event') and the resource ('GA4 Admin'), with an explicit example. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like ga4_list_key_events by marking 'WRITE', making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 usage when you want to convert an existing event into a conversion, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., if the event already is a key event) or suggest alternatives (e.g., listing key events first). It relies on the example for context.

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