get_gtm_workspace_diff

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds context about the nature of the diff (entities added/modified/deleted, merge conflicts) and the meaning of is_clean, which goes beyond annotations.

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 four sentences, each serving a purpose: stating the function, expanding on details, providing a real-world use case, and explaining the output. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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?

While the description covers the tool's purpose and output thanks to an output schema, it lacks parameter explanations. For a tool with three parameters and no schema coverage, the description carries too much burden but only partially fulfills it.

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 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions. The description does not explain workspace_id, gtm_account_id, or gtm_container_id. Users must infer from the tool name and context, which is insufficient.

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 'Show drafted-but-not-published changes in a GTM workspace' and lists what is returned (entities added/modified/deleted, merge conflicts). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_gtm_version (which shows full version) and list_gtm_workspaces (which just lists workspaces).

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?

Provides a troubleshooting scenario ('I edited a tag but nothing happened — the workspace was never published') that implies when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to use alternatives or when not to use it.

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