A single parameter, the gravitational growth index gamma, succeeds in characterizing the growth of density perturbations in the linear regime separately from the effects of the cosmic expansion. The parameter is restricted to a very narrow range for models of dark energy obeying the laws of general relativity but can take on distinctly different values in models of beyond-Einstein gravity. Motivated by the parameterized post-Newtonian (PPN) formalism for testing gravity, we analytically derive and extend the gravitational growth index, or Minimal Modified Gravity, approach to parameterizing beyond-Einstein cosmology. The analytic formalism demonstrates how to apply the growth index parameter to early dark energy, time-varying gravity, DGP braneworld gravity, and some scalar-tensor gravity.

For exploring the physics behind the accelerating universe a crucial question is how much we can learn about the dynamics through next generation cosmological experiments. For example, in defining the dark energy behavior through an effective equation of state, how many parameters can we realistically expect to tightly constrain? Through both general and specific examples (including new parametrizations and principal component analysis) we argue that the answer is 42 - no, wait, two. Cosmological parameter analyses involving a measure of the equation of state value at some epoch (e.g., w_0) and a measure of the change in equation of state (e.g., w') are therefore realistic in projecting dark energy parameter constraints. More elaborate parametrizations could have some uses (e.g., testing for bias or comparison with model features), but do not lead to accurately measured dark energy parameters.

In the quest for precision cosmology, one must ensure that the cosmology is accurate as well. We discuss figures of merit for determining from observations whether the dark energy is a cosmological constant or dynamical, with special attention to the best determined equation of state value, at the ``pivot'' or decorrelation redshift. We show this is not necessarily the best lever on testing consistency with the cosmological constant, and moreover is subject to bias. The standard parametrization of w(a)=w_0+w_a(1-a) by contrast is quite robust, as tested by extensions to higher order parametrizations and modified gravity. Combination of complementary probes gives strong immunization against inaccurate, but precise, cosmology.