Lookup Container

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses a key constraint: 'Pass exactly one of the two arguments,' which is not evident from the schema alone. The 'find' wording also implies a read-only lookup, but it doesn't describe error behavior when the constraint is violated.

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?

Two sentences with no filler: the first states the core purpose, the second gives the usage context and the argument constraint. Every sentence earns its place and the key information is front-loaded.

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 lookup tool with an output schema and two well-described parameters, the description provides sufficient context to invoke it correctly: what it finds, when to use it, and how to pass arguments. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to act.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description enhances parameter understanding by linking tag_id to its public GTM format and, more importantly, by specifying that exactly one argument must be passed, adding mutual-exclusivity semantics not present in the 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Find a container from its public GTM-XXXXXXX tag ID.' This clearly differentiates it from siblings like list_containers or get_container by focusing on the public tag ID lookup use case.

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?

It explicitly defines when to use the tool: 'Use this when you have a tag ID from a website's source but no account ID.' It doesn't name alternative tools, but the context is clear enough for an agent to distinguish it from related container operations.

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