Raw GraphQL Query (read-only)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds valuable behavioral context beyond them: mutations are rejected, output is raw JSON, and the GraphQL schema URL is provided. No contradictions exist between the description and 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 exceptionally concise and front-loaded, with the core action, endpoint, and critical constraint stated in the first sentence. The second sentence adds output format and usage preference without any filler.

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 the open-world nature of a raw GraphQL tool, the endpoint and schema URL provide solid grounding, and annotations cover the read-only safety profile. The main gap is the absence of parameter-level guidance, particularly for the optional 'variables' parameter, though the simplicity of the schema partially compensates.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it explains nothing about the 'query' or 'variables' parameters. The GraphQL schema URL helps an agent understand valid query syntax, but the description itself does not clarify how variables map to GraphQL variables or how to structure the query object.

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 identifies the action ('Run any read-only query'), the exact GraphQL endpoint, and the explicit constraint that mutations are rejected. It also distinguishes this raw query tool from the typed sibling tools by its raw JSON output and open-ended GraphQL nature.

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 gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate: arbitrary read-only GraphQL queries that the typed tools don't cover. It states that mutations are rejected and instructs the agent to 'prefer the typed tools,' providing usable selection guidance, though it doesn't name a specific alternative tool.

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