gtm_publish_version

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full disclosure burden but reveals only the headline effect. It does not state that publishing replaces the currently live version, whether the action is reversible, what permissions are required, or what a successful publish returns.

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?

Eight words, verb-first, with zero filler; every word contributes to the core meaning. Nothing needs to be trimmed or reordered.

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 consequential mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the 8-word description is insufficient. It omits what happens to the existing live container, whether the operation is reversible, and what the response looks like.

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 75%, and the fingerprint parameter is left undocumented in both the schema and the description. The phrase 'container version' merely restates containerVersionId and adds no meaning about parameter relationships or fingerprint's role in concurrency control.

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 ('Publishes') and resource ('a container version') with a clear outcome ('to make it live'). This distinguishes it from read-oriented siblings like gtm_list_versions, gtm_get_version, and gtm_get_live_version, as well as from gtm_create_version, which produces a draft rather than a 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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives; it never names gtm_create_version, gtm_get_live_version, or indexing_publish, nor does it state prerequisites such as the version needing to exist and be validated. The intended usage is only implied by the verb 'publish'.

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