gtm_list_containers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It correctly indicates a read-only list operation but does not disclose pagination behavior, permission requirements, or whether results are limited by default. It is not misleading, but it misses important behavioral context.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The essential action, resource, and scope are immediately visible, and every word contributes meaning.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, yet the description does not clarify the response format, how accountId and pageToken interact, or whether 'all' requires multiple paginated requests. An agent would not know whether a single call returns everything or whether it must loop through pages.

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 documents accountId as 'GTM Account ID', but pageToken has no description. The tool description adds no new meaning to either parameter and does not explain that pageToken is likely used for paginated results. With only 50% schema coverage, the description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 action ('Lists'), the resource ('containers'), and the scope ('within a GTM account'). This distinguishes it from gtm_get_container (single container) and gtm_list_triggers (different resource type).

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?

No guidance is given on when to choose this tool over related siblings such as gtm_get_container or gtm_list_workspaces. The usage is only implied by the name and description, with no explicit context or exclusions.

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