List Tag Manager workspaces

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

Even with readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint already declared, the description adds meaningful behavioral context by stating that writes operate on workspaces and never on the live container. The explicit 'Read-only' tag matches the annotations and creates no contradiction.

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 compact and front-loads the purpose in the first sentence. The final 'Read-only' is slightly redundant with the annotations, but the overall size is appropriate and no sentence is wasted.

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 list tool with five optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential call patterns (path vs split IDs), safety semantics, and read-only behavior. Pagination behavior is left to the schema's pageToken and limit descriptions, which is acceptable.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description's sentence about 'path or accountId + containerId' restates the relationship already documented in the schema; it does not introduce new semantic detail beyond an efficient summary.

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 opening sentence 'Lists workspaces in a container' is a specific verb+resource statement that clearly identifies the operation. The added context about workspaces being the safe editing surface helps distinguish this from sibling tools like gtm_list_containers and gtm_get_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 description gives clear context for why an agent would call this tool: workspaces are the safe editing surface and all writes target a workspace, not the live container. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but for a simple list tool the context is sufficient.

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