greymatter_field

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a query operation but does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or behavior on missing fields. The word 'query' suggests read-only but provides no explicit safety assurance.

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 extremely short and front-loaded with the operation. It wastes no words and includes a useful example. However, it is under-specified, which limits its value despite good structure.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should at least indicate the return value or type. It does not. The description also fails to clarify how this singular tool relates to the plural greymatter_fields sibling, leaving the agent without enough context to choose 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 descriptions are cryptic ('GraphQL: GreyMatterFieldBy!'). The example variables {'by':{'id':'<ID HERE>','name':''}} clarify that 'by' is an object with id and name fields, adding meaning beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is 100% and the example enriches the semantics, a 4 is warranted.

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 greymatterField' but does not state what a greymatterField is or what the tool returns. It is more of a template than an explicit purpose statement, and it does not distinguish from the sibling tool 'greymatter_fields'.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives like greymatter_fields. The description lacks any contextual cues about use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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