blueprint_list

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description repeats this with 'Read-only, no side effects.' It does add helpful conceptual context about blueprints being procedures compiled into task DAGs, but it does not disclose output details or pagination behavior. The added value over annotations is modest.

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 short, front-loaded with the core action, and the blueprint definition earns its place. The final sentence about being read-only is redundant with the annotations, but it is brief and does not significantly harm 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?

For a zero-parameter list tool with an output schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the description is complete. It states what is listed, explains the domain concept, and directs the agent to the correct instantiation tool, so nothing essential is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description appropriately adds no irrelevant parameter details.

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 and resource: 'List the blueprints available to instantiate.' It also distinguishes this from the related blueprint_instantiate tool by explicitly naming that tool, so an agent can tell listing apart from instantiation.

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 gives useful context about blueprints and points to blueprint_instantiate as the follow-up action, implying the list is used to choose a blueprint. However, it does not explicitly state when to use blueprint_list versus alternatives like blueprint_run, nor does it describe when not to use it.

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