blueprints_import_blueprint

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

No annotations are provided. The description only states the basic operation and destination path, but does not disclose whether it overwrites existing blueprints, side effects, auth requirements, or error behavior.

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 sentence that front-loads the key action and destination. It is concise and free of fluff, though additional detail could be added without harming conciseness.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown), the description omits important context for an import tool: return value, error handling, overwrite behavior, and relationship to sibling tools. It is minimally complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds some context for the 'url' parameter (e.g., GitHub raw or community forum) but does not explain the 'domain' parameter or its default value. Both parameters remain underdocumented.

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 clearly states the action (import), the resource (blueprint from a URL), and the destination (/config/blueprints/<domain>/...). It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete, list, and substitute.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., blueprints_substitute_blueprint). No context on prerequisites or scenarios.

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