get_graphql_schema

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

The readOnlyHint annotation indicates a safe read operation, and the description does not contradict it. The description adds the 'complete' scope but offers no additional behavioral context such as authentication requirements or potential response size. Given the annotation covers the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

One sentence, perfectly front-loaded, and without any filler. It conveys the core purpose efficiently.

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?

The tool is simple with four optional auth parameters and no output schema. The description states what it returns (the introspection), which is sufficient for the primary use case. However, it could mention authentication for protected endpoints and doesn't address when to use this vs siblings. Given the moderate complexity, a 3 is fair.

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 documents all four parameters with descriptions, providing 100% coverage. The description adds nothing about parameters, but the schema adequately explains endpoint, username, password, and bearer_token. Baseline 3.

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 the tool retrieves the complete GraphQL schema via introspection, using a specific verb and resource. The 'complete' qualifier distinguishes it from sibling tools that filter or get details, but not explicitly.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus filter_queries, get_type_details, or other siblings, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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