Analyze top converting pages and events in GA4 to identify high-performing content and optimize conversion paths.
Analyze top converting pages and events
| 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) | |
| eventName | No | Filter by specific event name |
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 carries full burden. It does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, has rate limits, or returns funnel steps. 'Analyze' is ambiguous about what operations are performed.
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 extremely concise (4 words), which is efficient but at the cost of clarity and completeness. It sacrifices important details that would help the agent understand the tool's purpose and usage.
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 complexity of conversion funnel analysis, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the output, how 'top converting' is defined, or what steps are involved. No output schema exists to compensate.
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% description coverage with clear parameter names (e.g., propertyId, startDate, endDate). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline of 3.
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 'Analyze top converting pages and events' specifies the resource (converting pages and events) and implies a focus on conversion, distinguishing it from generic analytics tools like analytics_top_pages. However, the verb 'analyze' is generic and could be more specific (e.g., 'list' or 'get funnel steps').
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as analytics_top_pages, analytics_trends, or other conversion-related tools. The description lacks context on prerequisites or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.