activecampaign_graphql_query

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by explicitly noting that the tool can perform mutations and should be treated as a write (annotations have readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false). It also mentions the endpoint URL. However, it could elaborate on potential side effects or idempotency.

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 concise with three sentences: purpose, behavioral warning, and usage guidance. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 GraphQL tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and informative annotations, the description covers the essential: purpose, when to use, behavioral note, and endpoint. It could mention that the response is JSON or provide an example, but overall it is sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description does not add significant additional meaning beyond the schema; it merely restates that the query document can be a mutation. Baseline score is appropriate as the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 verb ('Run'), the resource ('ActiveCampaign's Ecommerce GraphQL API'), and the action ('return the JSON result'). It also distinguishes itself from siblings by recommending REST tools for standard CRUD and this for precise field selection or ecommerce data, providing clear differentiation.

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?

Explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool ('precise field selection or ecommerce data') and when not to ('prefer dedicated REST tools for standard CRUD'). It also warns that GraphQL documents may contain mutations, indicating treatment as a write.

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