Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Google Analytics 4 MCP Server

Google Analytics 4 MCP Server

by stucchi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

create_google_ads_link

Link a Google Ads account to a GA4 property using property ID and customer ID for unified analytics.

Instructions

Link a Google Ads account to a GA4 property.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "property_id": "<property_id>",
      "customer_id": "<customer_id>"
    },
    "name": "create_google_ads_link"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
customer_idYes
property_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Link', which implies a mutation, but does not mention permissions, side effects, reversibility, or the output format. The output schema exists but is not described.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is concise and front-loaded, consisting of a single sentence. There is no wasted text, but it could benefit from additional clarity without losing conciseness.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of an output schema (unseen), the description does not explain return values. The tool has 2 required parameters with no explanation, and no annotations. The description is incomplete for reliable use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 0% description coverage. The two parameters (customer_id, property_id) are not explained in the schema or description. The agent cannot know where to obtain these IDs or what formats they expect. This is a critical gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (Link) and the resources (Google Ads account to GA4 property), but it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'list_google_ads_links' which deals with the same relationship. Still, for a simple linking action, it is sufficiently clear.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like viewing existing links. There are no prerequisites or contextual hints, leaving the agent to infer usage without support.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools