Gtm Version Header

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden here. It explicitly marks 'latest' as read-only, and 'List' implies a non-mutating operation. Still, it does not disclose permissions, rate limits, or any side-effect caveats, leaving only minimal behavioral transparency.

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 short, front-loaded with the core purpose, and uses a clear action-by-action bullet structure. Every sentence contributes useful information with no filler 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 tool with four parameters and zero schema description coverage, the description leaves significant gaps: 'path' and 'params' are undocumented, no behavior beyond 'read-only' is covered, and no guidance is given for choosing this over sibling tools. The presence of an output schema mitigates return-value documentation but not these other gaps.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'action' values and the 'parent' parameter, but says nothing about 'path' or 'params', which remain entirely opaque in both schema and description. This is partial compensation at best.

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 opens with 'List GTM container version headers,' which names a specific verb and resource. It also enumerates 'list' and 'latest' actions, making the operation clear. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tool gtm_version, so it falls short of a 5.

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 action list provides call syntax for 'list' and 'latest' with parent='<container>', giving some operational guidance. However, it never states when to prefer this tool over gtm_version or other siblings, and it lacks any explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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