As far as I can tell, "Ecclesiastical Latin" does not in fact seem to exist as a single defined standard. (I don't know whether it ever did.) There seems to be vagueness or uncertainty about a number of distinctions that are not present in a consistent form across varieties of Italian, such as the use of mid-open vowels [ɛ ɔ] versus mid-close vowels [e o] or the use of voiced [z] or voiceless [s] as a pronunciation of the consonant spelled s.
Pronunciations using the sounds of Modern Italian appear to be likely candidates for being labeled "Ecclesiastical Latin". There are a few differences in spelling conventions, however, so it wouldn't quite work to just pronounce written Latin words exactly as if they were unknown Italian words. I don't know how Google Cloud's Text-to-Speech API works.
For example, the current usual written form of Latin uses some digraphs that do not appear in the regular Italian spelling system, such as ae and oe (both pronounced like the letter e) and ph and th (pronounced like f and t respectively). It would be incorrect to pronounce the ae in Latin aes the same way as the ae in Italian maestro, or the oe in Latin poena the same way as the oe in Italian coeditare.
Ecclesiastical Latin uses the affricate sound [ts] in words spelled with ti followed by a vowel letter (except for in certain contexts; more exact conditions in my post here); Italian instead spells words pronounced with [ts] with the letter z, and uses the spelling ti only in words pronounced with non-affricate [t]. So, for example, Latin ratio, rationem in Ecclesiastical Latin need to be pronounced with [ts] (like Italian razione), not with [t].