workspace_create_version_and_publish

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses the production impact and confirmation requirement, but lacks details on side effects (e.g., workspace locking), response behavior, or permission needs beyond the env var. It is adequate but not comprehensive for a high-impact write 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?

Three concise sentences, front-loaded with action and critical warnings. Every sentence adds value: purpose, requirements, and caution. No unnecessary information.

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 no output schema and moderate param coverage, the description covers the core purpose, critical warnings, and requirements. It satisfies the immediate need for selection and invocation, though a bit more detail on the return value or error states could help. Overall, sufficient for a straightforward tool.

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 50% (3 of 6 parameters documented). The description adds no extra parameter information beyond the schema. With moderate coverage, baseline is 3, and no additional value is provided.

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 the action: creating a new container version from a workspace and immediately publishing it. The verb "create" and resource "container version from workspace" are specific, and the title [PUBLISH] distinguishes it from sibling tools like versions_create (create only) and versions_publish (publish existing). The warning about production impact further clarifies its unique role.

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?

Explicit requirements (GTM_MCP_ENABLE_PUBLISH=true, confirm=true) and a strong caution about production impact provide clear usage context. However, no alternative tools are named (e.g., versions_create for non-publishing), so the when-not-to-use is only implied by the warning.

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