raw_request

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

Annotations already indicate openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=true. Description adds that it uses the signed-in token and returns parsed JSON, which are useful behavioral details beyond 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?

Two concise sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action, no redundant information, and easy to parse quickly.

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?

Despite open world and destructive hints, description does not warn about potential risks of raw requests, nor covers all parameters. Lacks details on method, body, and query, making it incomplete for a flexible but dangerous tool.

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 description must compensate. Only 'path' is described with an example; 'method', 'body', and 'query' receive no guidance on usage or format, leaving critical ambiguity.

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?

Description clearly states 'Call any Griptonite API path with the signed-in token', specifying verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools that wrap specific endpoints.

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?

States it's 'Handy for discovering or wiring endpoints that aren't wrapped yet', providing clear context for when to use. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance but siblings imply alternatives.

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