templates_create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a behavioral requirement (environment variable GTM_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES must be true) and that confirm=true is necessary. It does not detail response behavior, error states, or side effects, but for a creation tool with a clear input schema, this is adequate.

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 consists of two sentences front-loaded with a '[WRITE]' indicator. Every word contributes necessary information: the action, prerequisites, and input format. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool has five required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately covers the purpose, prerequisites, and how to provide the body. It does not explain return values or error handling, but for a simple creation tool, this is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. The sibling list provides context that this is part of a broader templates group.

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% with descriptions for all five parameters. The description adds value by reinforcing that 'confirm' must be true and by specifying that 'bodyJson' should contain the full templates resource as a JSON string, which goes beyond the schema's brief description.

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 begins with '[WRITE]' which clearly indicates a write operation, followed by 'Create a new GTM template.' This clearly states the verb and resource. The sibling tools include other templates operations (get, list, delete, update, revert), so this tool is distinct as the creation endpoint.

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 explicitly states usage prerequisites: 'Requires GTM_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=true and confirm=true.' This tells the agent when to use the tool (for creating templates, with environment variable set) and what confirm parameter is needed. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but the write indicator and sibling context provide sufficient differentiation.

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