blueprint_add_variable

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviour. It explicitly states that the tool compiles and saves after adding the variable, which is a significant side effect. However, it does not mention permissions, duplicate variable handling, or failure modes, so it only partially covers behavioural transparency.

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 short sentence that front-loads the action and includes the important compile/save behaviour. No unnecessary words.

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 tool is a mutation with a nested type parameter, but the schema fully specifies parameter semantics, and the description covers the core operation and its side effects. It slightly lacks context about what happens if the variable exists or how to revert, but it is complete enough for a well-documented schema.

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 input schema provides descriptions for all five parameters, including the nested type descriptor with categories and container types. The description adds no additional information about parameters, but the schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 verb 'Add' and the resource 'member variable to a Blueprint', and distinguishes it from sibling tools like blueprint_remove_variable by specifying the add operation. It also mentions the follow-up compile and save steps, making the intent unambiguous.

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 implied usage context: it is for adding a variable to a Blueprint. However, it does not explicitly mention when to choose this over alternatives such as blueprint_set_variable_default or blueprint_add_function, nor does it list any prerequisites or exclusions.

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