ga4_create_firebase_link

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

The description discloses that this is a write operation (via '[GA4 WRITE]') and that it requires specific configuration ('GA4_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=true' and 'confirm=true'). Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It doesn't mention rate limits or idempotency, but it conveys the essential constraints 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.

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

The description is a single sentence that front-loads the key information ('[GA4 WRITE] Create a Firebase link'), then provides behavioral notes and requirements. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or filler. It is highly 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?

Given the tool is a simple create operation with no output schema, the description captures the essential constraints: write nature, update prohibition, and configuration prerequisites. It lacks details on return value or success/failure signals, but the schema already defines required parameters. For a create tool without complex side effects, this is nearly complete.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds critical semantic context: 'confirm' must be true to apply the change, which goes beyond the schema's generic description 'Must be true to apply the change.' It also implies the relationship between 'project' and 'property' without repeating the format. This adds meaningful guidance.

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 starts with '[GA4 WRITE]' clearly indicating the action type, and specifies 'Create a Firebase link'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'ga4_delete_firebase_link' and other GA4 create tools. The verb 'create' and resource 'Firebase link' are 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 explicitly warns that updates are not possible ('no update; delete + recreate to change'), which guides the agent to not use this tool for modifications. It also notes that the environment variable 'GA4_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES' and parameter 'confirm' are required. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it (e.g., when you want to link a Firebase project to GA4) or list alternative tools, but the context from the sibling list and the 'delete' counterpart is sufficient.

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