graphql

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions that mutations can be executed, implying potentially destructive operations, but it does not warn about side effects, permissions, error conditions, or reversibility. This is a substantial transparency gap for a mutation-capable tool.

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, featuring a one-line summary followed by a structured Args block. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler, making it easy to parse and understand.

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?

Although the tool has an output schema to cover return values, the description misses critical context for a mutation-capable tool: it does not mention side effects, required permissions, or scenarios where mutations should be avoided. The lack of annotations amplifies this incompleteness, leaving the agent without sufficient safety 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?

The schema has zero description coverage, but the description explicitly explains both parameters: 'query' as a GraphQL query or mutation document, and 'variables' as an optional GraphQL variables object. This adds meaning beyond the schema's property titles, though it lacks deeper detail such as formatting, constraints, or examples.

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 tool executes a GraphQL query or mutation, providing a specific verb (execute) and resource (GraphQL). It is unambiguous and easy to understand, though it does not differentiate from siblings because none are provided.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It simply states what the tool does without providing usage context, so an agent receives no decision-making support.

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