Gtm.Publish Version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. Repeating 'guarded' does not explain the guard: it does not say that a 'confirm' value is required, what value it should take, or that publishing makes a container version live. Nor does it note irreversibility or required permissions. This is too thin for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, but here brevity crosses into under-specification for a guarded mutation. It is concise, yet it omits the details an agent needs to call the tool correctly.

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?

For a publish operation that changes live container behavior, the description omits side effects, the confirm mechanism, the required prerequisites, and any indication of what publishing returns. An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation; but the pre-call and behavioral picture is essentially absent.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for two parameters. The description does not explain that 'version_path' identifies the container version resource to publish, or what 'confirm' expects, even though '(guarded)' appears to reference this confirm gate without saying so.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Publish a container version.' An agent knows exactly what operation this performs. However, it does not distinguish the tool from siblings such as gtm.create_version or gtm.list_versions, leaving the create-vs-publish distinction to inference.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of gtm.create_version, or on what prerequisites are required (draft version exists, workspace state, account permissions). The lone hint in '(guarded)' does not name an alternative or an exclusion.

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