Artel

blueprint_instantiate

Start a blueprint run to scaffold a multi-step procedure as a self-expanding task DAG, automatically creating the next wave of tasks as you complete each one.

Instructions

Start a blueprint run, scaffolds a multi-step procedure as a self-expanding task DAG.

A blueprint is a compiled procedure: template tasks plus the dependencies between them. Instantiating creates only the FIRST wave of real tasks. As each one is completed, the server expands the next wave automatically, including fan-out, where one task per discovered item is created from the completing task's output.

You do not drive the run. After instantiating, work it like any other board: claim the next open task, do it, complete it, repeat. The next tasks appear on their own, so nothing depends on you remembering the procedure.

Args: name: Blueprint name, as listed by blueprint_list(). params: Values for the blueprint's declared parameters, e.g. {"domain": "liquor"}. Missing parameters are rejected.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes	Blueprint name, as listed by blueprint_list().
`params`	No	Values for the blueprint's declared parameters, e.g. {"domain": "liquor"}. Missing parameters are rejected.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.47.0Sep 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses substantial behavior beyond the annotations: it creates only the first wave of tasks, auto-expands subsequent waves, includes fan-out from completed-task output, and does not require the caller to drive the run. This gives an agent a clear mental model of side effects and async behavior.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and then moves through the expansion model, caller responsibilities, and parameter usage without idle repetition. Every sentence adds operational context the agent needs.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a stateful operation with automatic task expansion, the description is complete: it explains the lifecycle, how the agent should interact afterward, and how params behave. An output schema covers return-value details, so nothing essential is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the Args section essentially restates the schema descriptions for name and params. The missing-parameters rejection and the example are already in the schema, so the prose adds no new parameter meaning.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Start a blueprint run') and explains that instantiation scaffolds a self-expanding task DAG. It is clear about what the tool does, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling blueprint_run, so an agent must infer how the two differ.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives strong post-call workflow guidance ('claim the next open task, do it, complete it, repeat') and implies that instantiation is for starting a blueprint-managed run. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose blueprint_instantiate over alternatives such as blueprint_run, or provide any when-not-to-use conditions.

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