versions_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description must convey behavior. It states it returns 'full contents', implying a read operation with no side effects. However, it does not explicitly mention that it is non-destructive, requires specific permissions, or has any rate limits. The description is adequate but not highly revealing.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that front-load the core purpose and then add a specific usage tip. Every word adds value, no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should outline what 'full contents' means (e.g., tags, triggers, zones). It fails to do so, leaving the agent uncertain about the return structure. Also, parameters are only partially explained. The description is not complete for a get operation with multiple parameters.

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 only 33%, yet the description only adds context for containerVersionId (repeating the schema's own hint about 'live'). It provides no insight into accountId or containerId, which remain undocumented. The description should have compensated for the low coverage by explaining all parameters.

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 'Get the full contents of a specific GTM container version.' This is a specific verb (get) and resource (container version), and it distinguishes itself from sibling get tools by focusing on versions. It also adds a special case for 'live' version.

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 provides a key usage guideline: passing 'live' as containerVersionId to retrieve the currently live version. This helps the agent choose the correct parameter value. However, it does not compare to other version tools like versions_list or versions_publish, nor does it state when to use this over others.

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