postGraphQL

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden but merely states 'Run a GraphQL query or mutation.' It fails to disclose that mutations are write operations, potential side effects, authentication needs, or error handling. The schema hint that queries read and mutations write is only in the parameter description, not the tool description.

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, concise sentence that immediately states the action. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. While very brief, it is effectively structured for a simple tool.

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 no output schema and 4 parameters, the description lacks crucial context: what is returned (likely JSON), error behavior, schema parameter meaning, and operational context. The tool is moderately complex (arbitrary GraphQL execution), but the description does not compensate for the missing structured information.

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%, and parameter descriptions are clear (e.g., query clarifies read vs mutation). The tool description adds no additional meaning, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema already provides semantic value.

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 'Run a GraphQL query or mutation' clearly specifies the action (run) and the resource (GraphQL query or mutation). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like postSql and postCall, which deal with SQL or function calls, though it could be more descriptive about the execution context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions. This leaves the agent without context for appropriate invocation.

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