filter_queries

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, which already signals a safe read operation, so the description need not cover safety. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'available' (suggesting introspection), but does not disclose details like whether queries are executed (they are not, per readOnlyHint) or response format. No contradiction with 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?

The description is a single sentence with no filler words. It is front-loaded with the key verb and resource, making it immediately understandable. Every word earns its place; ideal conciseness.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should clarify what the tool returns (e.g., a list of query names and optionally details). The current statement 'list available GraphQL queries' is somewhat vague about the exact output and how filtering works. It is adequate for a simple listing tool but leaves some gaps in context.

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% for all 6 parameters, so the schema fully documents each parameter. The tool description does not add extra meaning to parameters; it only states the overall purpose. Baseline 3 applies as schema carries the burden.

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 'Filter and list available GraphQL queries' uses a specific verb ('Filter and list') and resource ('available GraphQL queries'), clearly distinguishing this tool from its siblings such as 'filter_mutations' and 'get_graphql_schema'. The scope (queries vs. mutations) is immediately obvious, making it a strong purpose statement.

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 usage (when you need to list/filter GraphQL queries) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like 'filter_mutations' or 'get_graphql_schema'. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool mentions, so guidance is only implied rather than direct.

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