graphql_api_list

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

Annotations already declare this as a safe read-only operation, so the description does not need to restate that. The description adds the workspace scoping context but does not disclose potential pagination, sorting, or volume-related behavior, which could matter for a 'list all' operation.

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, focused sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then specifies the scope. Every word earns its place.

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 one-parameter read-only list operation with complete schema coverage, the description is mostly sufficient. A small gap is the lack of any mention of return shape or pagination behavior, but the list verb strongly implies a collection response, and the annotations already cover the safety profile.

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 input schema has 100% coverage: the single required parameter workspaceId has a description. The tool description only repeats the workspace scope already present in the schema and adds no additional semantic detail about the parameter's format, constraints, or relationship to the listed items.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('GraphQL API items') and scope ('in a workspace'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like graphql_api_get, which retrieves a single item, and graphql_api_execute_query, which runs operations.

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 implies the tool is for listing all GraphQL API items in a workspace, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives such as graphql_api_get for a single item or graphql_api_get_definition for item details. No exclusions or routing guidance is provided.

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