Get GTM Variable

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

The description adds no behavioral information beyond the annotations (read-only, idempotent, non-destructive). It does not mention error handling, return format, or side effects, but since annotations already cover key traits, it is adequate but not enhanced.

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, clear sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose without unnecessary detail. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the core action.

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 simplicity of a get operation, the description is sufficiently complete. It does not specify the exact return structure, but with no output schema and a read-only annotation, it does not omit critical information for a basic getter.

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 provides concise descriptions for each parameter (account ID, container ID, workspace ID, variable ID). The tool description does not add further meaning to these parameters, leaving their role implicit from the schema.

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 tool's function: retrieving full details of a specific GTM variable, including its type and parameters. This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools that create, update, delete, or list variables.

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 does not explicitly indicate when to use this tool instead of alternatives like listing variables or getting workspace status. While the name implies a targeted get operation, it lacks explicit guidance on selecting it over similar get/list tools.

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