Get blueprint details.

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'CALL IMMEDIATELY' adds minor context. It mentions raising an exception on connection failure, but lacks details on what happens if the blueprint does not exist or the identifier is invalid.

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 very short, but it includes some redundancy (repeats 'blueprint details' in the first line and under 'Returns'). The structure is functional, but could be more streamlined.

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 presence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values. However, it omits information about required input validity (e.g., what happens if the blueprint identifier does not exist) and does not fully leverage the annotations to provide comprehensive context.

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 100%, with parameter 'blueprint_identifier' described as 'The UUID, name or reply_id to query.' The description does not add any further semantic value beyond the schema.

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 'Get blueprint details,' indicating retrieval of a single blueprint's details. However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools like image-builder__get_blueprints, which lists blueprints, or image-builder__get_compose_details.

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 includes 'CALL IMMEDIATELY - No information gathering required,' suggesting it is safe to call, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as other get_* tools in the image-builder domain.

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