bb_graphql

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It lists scan types but does not state side effects, required permissions, whether data is modified, or what happens if the endpoint is not GraphQL.

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?

Single line, directly conveying the tool's purpose and key features with no redundant words.

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?

For a security scanner with 5 parameters and a potential complex output, the description lacks details on output format, behavior when scanning, and how parameters interact. It does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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%, and the description does not explain any of the 5 parameters (url, proxy, cookie, timeout, auth_token). The user gets no help understanding what each parameter does.

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 it is a GraphQL security scanner and lists specific attack types (introspection, batch query, deep recursion, schema extraction). This differentiates it from sibling tools focusing on other vulnerabilities like SQL injection or XSS.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool. While the purpose implies usage for GraphQL endpoint testing, there is no mention of alternatives or conditions where it is inappropriate.

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