ga4_run_funnel_report

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses that the API is v1alpha, that the surface may change, and that validation errors may require checking the Feb 2026 release notes. This is useful behavioral context beyond the structured annotations; no contradiction.

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 front-loaded and the funnel code block earns its place by adding structure the schema lacks. Minor redundancy exists between 'v1alpha, API surface may change' and the later alpha-flag sentence, but overall it is well organized.

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 complex alpha report tool with nested objects and zero schema descriptions, the description covers the central funnel structure, the intended drop-off use case, and the external reference link. It does not describe the remaining standard parameters, but the output schema exists and the reference URL fills any gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates well for the core funnel parameter by documenting its nested structure (is_open_funnel, steps, filter_expression, within_duration_from_prior_step) and clarifying funnel_breakdown and funnel_next_action. It leaves common parameters like date_ranges, limit, and dimension_filter without explicit descriptions, but their titles and types are largely self-explanatory.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Run a GA4 funnel report') and anchors usage with 'Use for drop-off analysis across a sequence of events.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling reporting tools like ga4_run_report and ga4_run_pivot_report.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('Use for drop-off analysis across a sequence of events'), which gives clear context against the sibling report tools. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls 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.