create_key_event

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral transparency. It does not disclose whether the operation is idempotent, whether it overwrites existing key event status, or what happens if the event is already a key event. 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 short (one sentence, 7 words), but it under-specifies the tool. Conciseness is valued, but not at the cost of omitting essential information.

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 has 2 parameters, an output schema, and a clear domain (Google Analytics key events), the description should at least explain the purpose of the parameters and the result. It fails to do so, leaving the agent to guess critical details.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain what the two required parameters (event_name, property_id) represent, what formats they expect, or how they relate to the operation. The description adds no value beyond the schema's structural types.

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 as a key event') and the resource ('event'), with parenthetical clarification ('conversion'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_key_event and list_key_events, but could be more explicit about what a key event is.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when creating versus listing or deleting key events). No prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions are mentioned.

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