Inspect the live GTM configuration

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive aspects. The description adds two critical behavioral notes: configuration is not proof of tag firing, and the response may be large. These go beyond what annotations provide and help the agent interpret the result correctly.

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 two sentences with no redundancy. The core purpose is stated first, followed by a caution and a size warning. Every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, key caveats, and usage hints. It does not describe the response structure, but given the nature of the tool (returning a full container), this is not a significant gap. The description is complete enough for an agent to call it correctly.

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 100% for the single 'path' parameter, which is already described as 'accounts/{account}/containers/{container}'. The description only adds a reiteration to choose a specific container, which does not add substantial new meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('the full currently published GTM version'), which is unambiguous. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like gtm_preview_version by using 'currently published' and 'live' in the title. The phrase 'choose a specific container' also clarifies the scope of the operation.

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 description gives a clear usage hint: 'choose a specific container' implies that the path parameter must identify a container, and it warns about large containers. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'use this for published config, not preview'). The guidance is implicit but useful.

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