Run one GraphQL mutation

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real behavioral value beyond that: the MutationError catch-all and __typename injection to detect HTTP 200 failures, and the explicit 'No automatic retry' contract.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero filler, and the core contract (one root field, confirmation) is front-loaded. Slightly telegraphic but 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?

No output schema exists, so some burden falls on the description, and it does disclose the error-detection mechanism and the no-retry policy. However, it omits what a failure response looks like beyond MutationError and never redirects to preview_operation, leaving a gap for a destructive, non-idempotent tool.

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 75%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the 'one direct root field' constraint for the undocumented document parameter, which is meaningful, but it adds nothing for confirm, account, or variables beyond what the schema already documents.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (run a GraphQL mutation) and adds a concrete constraint: one direct root field with explicit confirmation. It is distinguishable from graphql_query by the mutation keyword, though it never explicitly contrasts with that sibling.

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 phrase 'explicit confirmation' hints at the confirm parameter but gives no when-to-use versus graphql_query or preview_operation, and no guidance on prerequisites or when not to run a mutation directly. No alternatives are named.

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