nexus_graphql_query

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

It discloses raw pass-through behavior, v2 API usage, the fact that v1 rate-limit quota is not consumed, and the clean failure mode for mutations. It also specifies the exact return format: raw 'data' JSON or 'Error: ...' with GraphQL error messages. This meaningfully exceeds what the annotations alone communicate.

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 well-organized: purpose, endpoint/quota note, prerequisite, usage scope, and return format. Every sentence contributes a distinct fact; there is no filler or repetition.

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 raw GraphQL power-user tool, it covers prerequisites, allowed usage, failure behavior, and return format. It names the related nexus_graphql_introspect sibling and explains the relationship. The input schema covers all parameters, making the description complete for agent invocation.

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 both query and variables already having clear descriptions and concrete examples. The description adds contextual guidance about building valid queries but does not need to restate the parameter semantics.

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?

Description opens with 'Run a raw query against the Nexus v2 GraphQL API (power-user escape hatch)'—a specific verb, resource, and positioning. It clearly distinguishes itself from the many v1 REST siblings and from nexus_graphql_introspect by framing itself as the raw query executor.

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?

It explicitly instructs to 'Introspect types with nexus_graphql_introspect first to build valid queries' and says to 'Use for read-only queries'. It also warns that most mutations require OAuth scopes the server lacks and 'will fail cleanly', giving a clear exclusion and expected failure mode.

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