gtm_container

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions that the 'list' action returns paginated results. For a tool that includes destructive actions like 'remove', no side effects or authorization needs are described. Additional behavioral context is missing.

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 concise (one sentence plus a detail about list pagination). It is front-loaded and gets to the point quickly, but it could be slightly more informative without being wasteful.

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's complexity (10 parameters, multiple actions, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It explains pagination for 'list' but does not describe the other actions' behavior, outcomes, or when to use each action. The schema is rich, so the description compensates somewhat.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema, such as mentioning pagination for 'list'. It does not elaborate on parameter usage or constraints beyond what is already in the schema.

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 it performs all container-related operations and lists the specific actions (create, get, update, remove, etc.). This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from sibling tools which operate on different resources like tags or accounts.

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 the tool is for container operations but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus sibling tools or provide exclusion criteria. It lacks guidance on when not to use it or alternatives.

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