Publish version (🔴 goes live)

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

Annotations already flag destructive/non-idempotent/open-world, and the description adds value beyond them: the real-world effect on all site visitors, the authorization and role requirements, the two-gate safety mechanism, and the rollback procedure. This is exactly the extra context annotations cannot express.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the highest-stakes fact (goes live for everyone) before prerequisites and rollback. No filler; every clause carries actionable information.

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 destructive, open-world mutation, the description covers impact, prerequisites, safety gates, and reversal, and an output schema exists so return values need no explanation. Nothing an agent needs before invoking it is missing.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it explains the two least obvious ones well: dry_run defaults to a diff view, and confirm must be true alongside dry_run=false. version_id is implied through the rollback sentence, but the 'container' parameter's expected form (id vs. path vs. name) is never clarified.

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 ('Make a container version LIVE') plus the blast radius ('for every visitor of the website'), which separates it cleanly from gtm_create_version and gtm_get_live_version. The 🔴 marker in the title and description signals severity without ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative mode ('dry_run (default) shows the version vs the current live version') and the exact preconditions for the live path: auth --with-writes, Publish role, dry_run=false AND confirm=true. It also supplies recovery guidance ('Rollback = publish the previous version id'), so both when-to-use and what-to-do-after are covered.

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