List GA4 Properties

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint: false. The description adds useful context beyond those: it clarifies that results depend on the connected account, that property IDs are returned for downstream report tools, and that connection must be configured. This is meaningful supplementary behavior for a read-only list tool.

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 compact and well-organized: a one-sentence purpose, then Args, Returns, and Use when sections. Every sentence contributes useful information, and the purpose is front-loaded 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?

For a simple listing tool, the description covers all needed operational context: required connection, output format choice, what the return value is used for, and when to invoke it. Annotations cover the safety profile, so no critical guidance is missing even without an output schema.

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 coverage is 50%, so the description partially compensates: it notes connection is a configured Google connection and points to list_connections. For response_format, it restates the enum and default already present in the schema without adding deeper meaning such as when to pick one format over the other. This is adequate but not additive.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List every Google Analytics 4 property the connected Google account can access.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings by naming GA4 properties specifically, and the scope ('every...can access') is precise.

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 explicit use cases: 'What GA4 properties do I have access to?' and looking up a property_id before running a report. It also references list_connections for connection setup. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool or name an alternative for excluded cases, so it stops short of a 5.

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