templates_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the write nature and required confirmation, but does not mention side effects, return value, or idempotency. The behavior is partially transparent.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. The [WRITE] prefix immediately conveys the operation type.

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 complexity (5 required params, no output schema, no annotations), the description lacks details on the expected resource structure beyond a generic JSON string. It does not explain what a 'template' resource consists of or what the response will be.

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 description adds only marginal value by reiterating that bodyJson should be a JSON string containing the full resource. Other parameters are standard IDs with sufficient schema 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?

The description clearly states 'Create a new GTM template' with a specific verb and resource. The [WRITE] prefix further distinguishes it from read-only siblings like templates_list and templates_get.

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 specifies the prerequisites (GTM_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=true and confirm=true) but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus templates_update or templates_delete. No comparison to siblings is given.

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