blueprints_list_blueprints

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication requirements, or error behavior. While listing is generally safe, the description is minimal and does not confirm safety or side effects.

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, well-structured sentence that conveys the essential information efficiently with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, list operation) and presence of an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It could mention that it returns a list of blueprint objects, but the output schema likely covers that. Minor gap in explaining 'installed' semantics.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, but the description adds significant value by specifying the allowed values ('automation' or 'script') for the domain parameter. This clarifies usage beyond the schema's type and default alone.

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 ('list') and resource ('installed blueprints'), and specifies the domain parameter with valid values ('automation' or 'script'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools that list other resources (e.g., automations_list_automations).

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 implies usage context by mentioning the domain parameter, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like blueprints_substitute_blueprint or automations_list_automations. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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