query-graphql-web

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions querying but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or whether it's read-only or mutative. This is inadequate for a tool that interacts with a GraphQL endpoint.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for the tool's complexity, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on authentication, response format, error cases, and differentiation from siblings, making it insufficient for safe and effective use.

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 0%, so the schema provides no param details. The description adds minimal semantics by naming 'query' and 'variables' as inputs, but doesn't explain their formats, constraints, or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate as it compensates somewhat but not fully.

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 action ('Query') and target ('a Sitecore GraphQL web endpoint'), specifying it's for web endpoints (not master). However, it doesn't differentiate from its sibling 'query-graphql-master' beyond the endpoint type, missing explicit comparison.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'query-graphql-master' or other query tools in the sibling list. The description implies usage for GraphQL queries but lacks context on prerequisites, endpoint differences, or exclusions.

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