sui_graphql_introspect

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool returns the type system, which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly disclose any behavioral traits such as no side effects, required permissions, or rate limits. The description is adequate but not thorough.

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 consists of two concise sentences. The first sentence clearly states the action and result, and the second sentence adds the purpose. No unnecessary words or 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 tool has only two optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the purpose and parameter usage. It explains how to narrow the introspection and the network context. The missing information about the output format is somewhat compensated by the clear purpose of enabling queries.

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%, with both parameters having descriptions in the schema. The description adds examples for 'type_name' (e.g., 'Address', 'TransactionBlock') and clarifies the default behavior for 'network'. While this adds some value, the schema already provides the core meaning, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb 'introspect', the resource 'Sui GraphQL schema', and the purpose 'so an agent can construct a valid sui_graphql_query'. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'sui_graphql_query' by explaining that this tool provides the schema for constructing queries.

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 implies that this tool should be used before constructing a GraphQL query, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternative tools. The relationship with 'sui_graphql_query' is clear, but more explicit guidance would be beneficial.

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