Delete blueprint

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

The description adds critical context beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true) by explaining that the first call is safe and changes nothing, returning a preview and confirm_token. It also discloses that servers built from the blueprint are unaffected, which is valuable behavioral information.

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?

Two concise sentences with no superfluous wording. The description is front-loaded with the action and immediately explains the safe call pattern, making it easy to parse.

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 essential operational flow (preview, confirm, effect on built servers) and is sufficient for most use cases. It lacks details on error conditions (e.g., invalid token) and the exact meaning of dry_run, but overall it is complete enough for a moderately complex delete tool.

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 only 33% (only blueprint has a description). The description explains the role of confirm_token and the workflow, but it does not clarify the dry_run parameter or how it interacts with the two-step process. Partial compensation, but not complete.

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 'Delete a saved blueprint from the local store,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like save_blueprint, get_blueprint, and list_blueprints by focusing on deletion, and adds context that servers built from it are untouched.

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 explicit usage guidance for the two-step confirmation flow: call once for a preview and token, then repeat with the token to delete. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the intent is clear from the context and sibling tools.

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