access_control_policy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It implies a read via 'query' but does not explain pagination, authorization requirements, return format, or side effects. The variable list provides no behavioral context beyond field names.

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, compact line with a variable list and example; no wasted words. The technical format is efficient but lacks narrative context, making it slightly less readable yet still concise.

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?

This is a complex 13-parameter query with no output schema and no annotations. The description omits return value details, domain context, and usage guidance, leaving significant gaps. The example JSON only partially compensates for these missing elements.

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% but descriptions are only GraphQL types, so the baseline is 3. The description adds an example JSON illustrating structure for filters, ordering, and cursor parameters, which is helpful, but it does not explain the semantic meaning of each parameter beyond identifiers.

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 says 'query accessControlPolicy', which identifies a read operation for a single policy, but does not state in plain language what the tool does or how it differs from siblings like access_control_policies. It is not tautological but remains vague about the resource and scope.

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 such as access_control_policies (plural) or create/update/delete policy tools. The example shows how to construct a query but does not explain the appropriate use case or prerequisites.

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