gtm_list_containers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It explicitly declares 'Read-only' and describes the returned data, which is sufficient behavioral disclosure for a parameterless listing tool. It does not cover error cases or pagination, but those are less critical here.

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. 'Read-only' is placed first, and the output specifics ('names + public GTM-XXXX ids') justify the rest of the sentence.

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 0-parameter, no-output-schema listing tool, the description is complete: it states what is listed, the resource scope, and the exact data returned. No further context is needed 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. The description's mention of the output fields adds useful context despite the empty input schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('list'), names a precise resource ('GTM accounts and their containers'), and specifies the output ('names + public GTM-XXXX ids'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like ga4_list_properties and gtm_create_container.

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 read-only listing behavior implies this is a discovery tool, but there is no explicit statement of when to use it or when to prefer a sibling such as gtm_create_container. Usage context is implied rather than spelled out.

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