Google Analytics 4 MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

run_report

Run a Google Analytics 4 report by specifying dimensions, metrics, and date range, with optional filters to focus on specific data.

Instructions

Run a GA4 report with dimensions, metrics, date range, and optional filters.

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>",
      "dimensions": "<dimensions>",
      "metrics": "<metrics>"
    },
    "name": "run_report"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`metrics`	Yes
`end_date`	No	today
`dimensions`	Yes
`start_date`	No	28daysAgo
`property_id`	Yes
`dimension_filter_name`	No
`dimension_filter_value`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Jul 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states it 'runs a report', lacking disclosure of behavioral traits such as output format, read-only nature, rate limits, or authentication needs.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, concise sentence with no unnecessary words, achieving high clarity in minimal space.

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?

Despite having an output schema and 9 parameters, the description fails to explain return values, default behaviors (e.g., default dates), or constraints, leaving significant gaps for effective use.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only lists general categories (dimensions, metrics, date range, filters) without explaining specific parameters like limit, offset, property_id, or filter fields.

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 it runs a GA4 report with dimensions, metrics, date range, and filters. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'run_realtime_report', which could lead to confusion.

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 run_realtime_report, or any prerequisites. The agent receives no context for decision-making.

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