list_blueprints

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states the tool is a read operation returning a compact summary with specific fields (id, name, tags, updatedAt). This is adequate transparency for a listing tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence adds value. No wasted 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?

Given zero parameters and an output schema exists (handling return value explanation), the description is complete. It tells the agent what the tool does, what it returns, and how to proceed next.

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% (no parameters), so baseline is high. The description adds context by explaining what the output contains (compact summary) and the specific fields, which is helpful beyond an empty 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Cloudcraft blueprint (diagram)') and clarifies scope ('in the authenticated account'). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'get_blueprint' by noting this returns a summary, not full node/edge JSON.

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 explicitly states to use 'get_blueprint' afterwards for full details, providing clear guidance on the tool's role in a workflow. However, it does not mention when not to use it or any alternative among siblings.

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