add_blueprint_cast_node

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior itself. It reveals the underlying node class (K2Node_DynamicCast) and the exact return structure including pins, but it doesn't mention side effects such as modifying the blueprint asset, error conditions, or prerequisites beyond the parameters.

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 compact and front-loaded with the purpose. It uses clear sections (Args, Returns, KB, Example) without redundancy, though the Returns section is slightly verbose.

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?

The description covers the parameters, return values, and includes a KB reference and example, which is sufficient to call the tool. It lacks guidance on when to use it versus similar node-adding tools and does not mention whether the graph is modified immediately.

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 description must fully explain the parameters. It does so for all four: blueprint_name, cast_target_class (with examples of short names and full paths), graph_name (default), and node_position (optional [X,Y] format). This exceeds what the schema offers.

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 clear action: add a specific node type (K2Node_DynamicCast) to a Blueprint graph. It names the resource precisely and provides an example, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool add_cast_node.

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 by the action and parameters but no explicit guidance is given about when to choose this over alternatives like add_cast_node or other blueprint node tools. There are no exclusions or conditional recommendations.

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