filter_mutations

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which is consistent with the description's 'Filter and list' wording. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as whether the tool performs introspection, handles authentication, or what output format to expect.

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, front-loaded sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. No filler or redundant information is present, making it highly concise and appropriately sized.

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?

With no output schema and a sparse description, the tool's return behavior, pagination (if any), and authentication requirements are left unexplained. The description covers only the basic action and resource, which is insufficient for an agent to fully anticipate tool behavior.

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%, so parameter semantics are fully handled by the schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond indicating that 'filter' relates to the search parameter and 'list' to the overall operation, which is minimal added 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 uses a specific verb 'Filter and list' with a clear resource 'GraphQL mutations'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like filter_queries and filter_types by explicitly targeting mutations.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as filter_queries or get_graphql_schema. The name and sibling context imply use for mutations, but the description itself gives no explicit usage context or exclusions.

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