get_gtm_trigger

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds valuable context by detailing what the raw configuration includes (filters, validation settings, list of tags using the trigger), which goes beyond the annotations and helps the agent understand the behavior.

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 long, front-loaded with the main action, and each sentence adds meaningful information. There is no redundancy or waste.

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?

Given the tool returns a full configuration, has an output schema, and has 3 parameters with 0% schema coverage, the description is partially complete. It explains the output content and use case but lacks parameter context and doesn't mention that the output schema exists. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 3 parameters, the description needs to compensate but only vaguely mentions 'a single GTM trigger' and 'specific trigger ID'. It does not explain the optional gtm_account_id and gtm_container_id parameters, their purpose, or default behavior. This is a significant gap.

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 clearly states the tool gets the full RAW configuration for a single GTM trigger. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full RAW configuration'), and it distinguishes itself from siblings like list_gtm_triggers (which lists all triggers) by focusing on a single trigger and including diagnostic purpose.

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 provides a clear use case: 'Use to diagnose why a tag with a specific trigger ID does or doesn't fire.' This gives context on when to use the tool, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it's slightly less than a 5.

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