Retrieve audience segments (New vs Returning, Age, OS) for any date range in a single batch request from GA4.
Get audience segmentation (New vs Returning, Age, OS) in a single batch
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| propertyId | Yes | GA4 Property ID | |
| accountId | No | GA4 account ID for multi-account setups | |
| startDate | Yes | Start date (YYYY-MM-DD) | |
| endDate | Yes | End date (YYYY-MM-DD) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It mentions a 'single batch' call but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as how data is returned, error behavior, rate limits, or whether it requires specific permissions. The description is too minimal to inform the agent about operational characteristics.
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 directly states the tool's function and scope. There is no unnecessary text, and it is front-loaded with the key verb 'Get'. Every word earns its place.
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 presence of 4 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is too brief. It does not explain the return format, how the dimensions are returned, any limitations on date ranges, or whether results are aggregated. This leaves the agent underinformed for safe invocation.
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 100% coverage of parameter descriptions. The tool's description does not add meaning beyond the schema—it only abstracts the purpose. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents each parameter's role.
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 purpose: to get audience segmentation data including New vs Returning, Age, and OS. It uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'audience segmentation', and the mention of multiple dimensions distinguishes it from sibling tools like analytics_trends or analytics_query.
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. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or any specific use case context that would help an agent choose it over other analytics tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.