query_shopify

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does mention mutation capability and the need to 'enable mutation operations', which signals potential write effects. However, it does not elaborate on consequences of mutations (e.g., irreversibility, permission requirements, rate limits) or error behavior. Adequate but minimal.

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?

Two sentences, zero fluff. The core purpose and distinguishing scope are front-loaded, and the 'options' clause covers the additional parameters efficiently. Every sentence earns its place.

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 flexible catch-all with three well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It covers purpose, scope, and the mutation gate. A minor gap is that it doesn't mention how to discover available endpoints, though the sibling `introspect_admin_schema` tool exists for that purpose.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters. The description adds marginal interpretive value by framing `query` as custom GraphQL and mentioning that variables and mutation-enabling are options, but it does not provide syntax, formatting, or deeper semantic guidance beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb ('executes'), a clear resource ('custom GraphQL queries or mutations against the Shopify Admin API'), and differentiates the tool from siblings by framing it as a flexible fallback for endpoints 'not covered by the specialized tools'. This is immediately distinguishable from the specialized sibling tools.

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 description explicitly says when to use this tool: when you need an endpoint 'not covered by the specialized tools'. It does not list specific sibling tools or give explicit 'do not use when' examples, but the condition is clear enough for an agent to route appropriately.

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