tigergraph__drop_query

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description explicitly warns that the deletion is permanent, cannot be undone, will break code calling the query, and that queries in use by other queries cannot be dropped. These are meaningful behavioral disclosures that add real context beyond the structured 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 well-organized with clear sections: purpose, use cases, quick start, warning, tips, and related tools. It front-loads the core purpose and warning, and every section adds practical value for a destructive operation.

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 destructive single-purpose tool with full schema coverage and strong annotations, the description provides sufficient operational context: when to use it, what will happen, limitations, and related tools. No output schema is present, but a simple success/failure outcome is reasonably inferred from the operation.

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%, and each parameter already has a clear schema description, especially profile and graph_name. The description only adds a Quick Start example with query_name, which does not materially expand parameter semantics beyond what the input schema provides.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Drop (delete) an installed query from TigerGraph.' It clearly identifies the operation and target, and the phrase 'installed query' distinguishes it from related query-management tools like install_query and show_query.

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 'Use When' section provides explicit contexts: removing unneeded queries, cleaning up test queries, and before re-installing a modified query. It also offers a useful tip to use show_query before dropping, but it does not fully lay out when not to use the tool or name alternatives as explicit directives.

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