nexus_graphql_introspect

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: the tool is backed by v2 GraphQL, avoids v1 REST quota, returns a specific JSON shape, and returns null for nonexistent types. No contradictions with annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded: a one-line purpose, a short note on backend/rate-limit behavior, and a clear return summary. Every sentence adds distinct value without redundancy.

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 a single well-documented parameter, an output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers all key decision factors: what it introspects, why it is useful, the API backend, rate-limit implications, and the return/null behavior. Nothing important is missing for selecting and invoking the tool 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?

There is only one parameter, type_name, and the schema description covers it fully with examples like 'Mod', 'ModsFilter', and 'Collection.' The description adds no additional parameter detail, but with 100% schema coverage the baseline of 3 applies.

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 opens with 'Introspect any type in the Nexus v2 GraphQL schema,' naming a specific verb, resource, and scope. It also explicitly frames its role as a discovery step for nexus_graphql_query, which differentiates it clearly from sibling tools.

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 states it is 'useful for discovering filters, sorts, and fields before composing a query with nexus_graphql_query,' giving an explicit use case and pointing to the companion tool. It also adds the operational advantage that it does not consume the v1 REST rate-limit quota, helping the agent decide when to prefer it.

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