containers_list

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

The description proactively discloses automatic pagination handling ('Automatically follows pagination to return all containers'), which is a key behavioral trait beyond the input schema. With no annotations, this adds significant transparency about expected behavior and limits.

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 short sentences, each essential. The first states the core purpose, the second adds a critical behavioral detail. No redundancy or fluff.

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 list tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main function and pagination behavior. It could mention the output structure or field set, but overall it is sufficiently complete given the context.

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 explains each parameter (accountId, maxPages, pageToken). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 'List all GTM containers within a GTM account' with a specific verb ('list'), resource ('containers'), and scope ('within a GTM account'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like containers_get or containers_create by focusing on listing all containers.

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?

The description implies usage for listing all containers in an account but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or comparison with alternatives like containers_lookup or containers_get. No exclusions or context-switching cues are provided.

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