clients_create

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the write operation, the need for confirmation, and the expected input format. However, it does not describe what happens on success/failure or return value, which is acceptable for a create operation.

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 sentence plus the [WRITE] label, with no wasted words. Every element earns its place.

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?

No output schema, so return value is not documented, but the tool is simple: it creates a client. The required parameters are clear from schema and context. The description covers the key behavioral aspects, making it mostly complete for agent selection and invocation.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds a brief note about passing the resource as a JSON string in bodyJson, which reinforces the schema, but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema already provides through property descriptions.

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?

Clearly states 'Create a new GTM client' with a verb and specific resource. The [WRITE] prefix and the list of sibling tools like clients_list and clients_get distinguish this creation action from read or update actions.

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?

Explicitly states requirements: GTM_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=true and confirm=true. This guides the agent on when to use the tool and what conditions to meet. Does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the context of siblings implies 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.