graphql_query

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It adds one piece of behavioral context: read-only mode rejects mutation documents. However, it does not disclose the potentially destructive nature of arbitrary GraphQL mutations, authentication requirements, or error/response behavior, leaving significant gaps for a raw query tool.

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 four sentences, with no filler. Each sentence delivers essential information: purpose, use case, required input, and a behavioral caveat. The most important information is front-loaded.

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?

For a generic GraphQL proxy tool, the description covers the core purpose, usage guidance, and a key behavior (read-only mode). It does not mention the customer_slug override or response format, but the schema covers parameters and GraphQL responses are self-describing. Overall, it is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds value by emphasizing 'the full query/mutation string' and an 'optional variables object', reinforcing parameter usage. It does not mention customer_slug, but the schema's description sufficiently explains it.

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 'Run an arbitrary GraphQL document against the GreyMatter API', identifying both the action and the resource. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by noting 'Use this for operations not covered by a dedicated tool'.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'for operations not covered by a dedicated tool', which inherently defines the alternative (dedicated tools). It also provides practical instructions on providing the query and variables, plus a caveat about read-only mode rejecting mutations.

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