wrike_list_blueprints

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It simply restates the tool name without disclosing whether it is read-only, any pagination behavior, access limitations, or response format details. The only added word is 'templates', which is not a behavioral trait.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. No unnecessary words or fluff.

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 simple zero-parameter list tool, the description is minimally adequate but leaves gaps. It does not mention what data is returned (e.g., blueprint IDs, names) or if there are limits. There is no output schema or annotations to compensate.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics since none exist, and it correctly implies that the operation takes no arguments.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('blueprints/templates') with a clear scope ('all'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like wrike_get_blueprint (which retrieves a single blueprint) and wrike_launch_blueprint (which launches one).

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?

Usage is implied: you would use this to get all blueprints. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over alternatives like wrike_get_blueprint or wrike_list_tasks, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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