gtm_tag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it only lists operations without disclosing side effects, permissions, or other behavioral traits. The mention of 'delete' implies destructive behavior, but no context is given.

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 concise sentence, efficient and front-loaded. The opening phrase 'Performs tag operations' is somewhat redundant with the name, but the listing of operations adds value without wasted words.

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 multi-action dispatcher with 6 parameters and a nested config object, the description is under-specified. It omits action-specific parameter requirements, output behavior, and any caveats, making it insufficient for reliable invocation without schema inference.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the action enum, which overlaps with the schema's action property.

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 identifies the resource (tag) and lists the operations (get, list, create, update, delete), making the purpose clear. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools like gtm_trigger or gtm_variable, but the resource name suffices to differentiate.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any indication of which action to choose for common scenarios. The schema offers an enum of actions, but the description fails to explain use cases or prerequisites.

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