Get GTM measurement inventory

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds value by listing what the inventory contains, but it does not disclose behavior such as pagination limits, default result size, or how the query parameter impacts results, which would be useful context.

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 a single efficient sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and directly enumerates the return contents, making every word useful.

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 inventory tool, the description conveys the broad output categories, and annotations cover safety. However, it omits guidance on when to use it relative to lineage/ownership siblings and does not clarify parameter behavior, leaving the overall context only partially 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the tool description does not explain the two parameters, 'limit' or 'query'. The names are somewhat self-explanatory, and the schema provides types and constraints, but the description adds no explicit meaning about filtering or result limiting.

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 clear verb, 'Return', and identifies the resource as a measurement inventory, enumerating the included categories: assets, systems, integrations, reports, ownership, and lineage. It is informative but does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like gtm_trace_lineage or gtm_resolve_ownership, which also touch lineage and ownership concepts.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state that it is for broad inventory overviews rather than specific lineage traces or ownership lookups, nor does it describe any exclusions or preferred contexts.

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