Validate GraphQL codeblocks against a specified Shopify store's API version without executing them. Ensure operations are syntactically and semantically correct before deployment.
Validate Admin GraphQL operations against this store API version without executing them.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| store | Yes | ||
| codeblocks | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.6.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds a meaningful behavioral detail by stating the operations are not executed, which goes beyond a simple read-only hint. No contradiction 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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the core action, resource, scope, and a key behavioral constraint efficiently.
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?
The tool has no output schema and its two parameters are completely undocumented in both the schema and description. While the purpose is clear and annotations cover safety, the description does not explain expected parameters or the shape of validation results, leaving notable gaps for an agent.
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 does not explain the 'store' parameter or the structure of 'codeblocks'. The phrase 'Admin GraphQL operations' only loosely maps to the codeblocks array and does not clarify fields like content, revision, or artifactId.
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 states a specific verb ('Validate'), a specific resource ('Admin GraphQL operations'), and a clear scope ('against this store API version'). The phrase 'without executing them' clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like shopify_graphql_query and shopify_graphql_mutation.
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 communicates that this tool is for validation rather than execution, giving agents a clear context for when to choose it over executing GraphQL tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusion criteria, so it stops short of full guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.