blueprint_list_blueprints

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond the raw endpoint path — no pagination behavior, no note about default page size of 20 or total counts, and no explanation of what a returned blueprint record contains.

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?

It is very short and front-loads the verb, but the second line ("GET /blueprint/api/blueprints") merely repeats the endpoint already present in the annotations title, so it does not earn its place. The terseness reflects under-specification rather than tight writing.

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?

With 14 optional filter parameters, no output schema, and no explanation of pagination or what the listing returns by default, the description is too thin. A one-line label plus a REST path leaves the agent without the context needed to use the filter set confidently.

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%, so every one of the 14 parameters is documented in the schema; that sets the baseline at 3. The description adds no additional meaning or examples beyond what the schema states.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("Lists ... blueprint"), so an agent can tell it is the collection/list operation. It does not distinguish itself from siblings such as blueprint_get_blueprint or blueprint_list_blueprint_versions, and the "draft" qualifier is ambiguous since the tool actually lists all blueprints (with optional filters for released/versioned).

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus blueprint_get_blueprint (single fetch) or the other blueprint list tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer from the name alone.

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