gtm_list_versions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It adds useful context that the tool returns only version headers (not full content) and covers both published and saved versions. However, it omits details such as pagination, authorization requirements, or return format.

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 sentence of 9 words, front-loaded with the action and resource. No excessive detail or repetition.

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 simple 2-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It tells what the tool lists but does not describe the returned object structure or any limits. Given the low complexity, it is marginally complete.

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 schema coverage for parameter descriptions is 0%, and the description does not explain the parameters at all. The parameter names 'account_id' and 'container_id' are self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic detail beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with the resource 'container version headers', and clarifies the scope 'published + saved versions'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gtm_list_containers (lists containers) and gtm_get_live_version (gets the live version).

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 use case is implied by the 'List' verb, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like gtm_get_live_version or gtm_create_version. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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