validate_graphql_query

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'validate and update' but does not explain side effects, such as whether update implies mutation, what happens on failure, or required permissions. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 short sentence, making it concise without wasted words. While not highly structured, it is efficient and front-loaded. However, it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not explain return values or behavior. With 3 parameters (1 required) and no annotations, the description is sparse and does not cover usage scenarios, outcomes, or edge cases, leaving gaps for an AI agent.

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 100%, with each parameter already described in the input schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 applies. No extra context is provided to enhance understanding.

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 'Validate and update a GraphQL query' clearly states the action (validate and update) and the resource (GraphQL query). It is specific but does not differentiate from sibling tools like execute_graphql_query or generate_graphql_query, which limits its clarity in context.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., execute_graphql_query, generate_graphql_query). There are no explicit conditions, exclusions, or recommended contexts, leaving the agent to infer usage without sufficient direction.

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