Skip to main content
Glama

australian-ai-governance-framework

by au.com.aiframework

Get AI governance framework

get_ai_governance_framework
Idempotent

Returns the framework. The free preview covers the first two of the six AI6 practices in the National AI Centre's Guidance for AI Adoption — Accountability (Decide who is accountable) and Impact Assessment (Understand impacts and plan accordingly) — and part of the legislative mapping. The result carries the document as Markdown in the structuredContent field "framework_markdown", and in the text content block for clients that read those. The document, including its closing disclaimer, is the product the user receives. The result also includes a view_url, where the same document can be read in a browser; the preview page is read-only, and printing, saving and the extension of the link from two hours to 18 months are part of the purchased framework. The complete six-practice framework adds Risk Management (Measure and manage risks), Transparency & Information Sharing (Share essential information), Testing & Monitoring (Test and monitor) and Human Oversight (Maintain human control). It is a one-time $88 AUD including GST purchase at https://aiframework.com.au. There is no payment through this endpoint. The result includes a purchase_url which opens aiframework.com.au with this session's profile already loaded, so the user lands on the preview and its paywall rather than answering the questionnaire again. Payment is a further step on the website, through Stripe. Both links expire two hours after the profile was created. Informational only — presents a framework, not advice or compliance guidance.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
session_idYesSession ID returned by start_australian_ai_governance_framework

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description discloses behavioral and business information far beyond the annotations: for example the document is returned as markdown, the free preview is read-only, printing/saving requires the paid purchase, links expire in two hours, and the result is informational only and fallible. This gives an agent a realistic sense of what happens when the call.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than most, but every sentence adds useful operational or transactional context. It starts with the top-level action ('Returns the framework.') followed by preview scope, output format, URL behavior, pricing, and disclaimer. Anything not relevant would be easy to cut, but this is information an agent likely needs.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description is responsible for describing both the markdown output location and view_url behavior,. It also covers payment, choice of return channel, timeouts, and the prevalence of explanation. For a one-parameter retrieval go tool, this definition gives a well-rounded view an agent can handle the response expectations.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The only parameter, session_id, is already described 100% in the schema as returned by start_australian_ai_governance_framework. The description adds the connected expiry/ownership detail, but doesn't need to repeat parameter semantics for an agent. This is a schema-carrying situation, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the tool as returning an AI governance framework, specifically the National AI Centre's AI6 framework, and enumerates the practices involved. It is less a tautology, though it doesn't explicitly state how this retrieval tool differs from the sibling start/submit tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The flow is implicitly clear: the session_id comes from start_australian_ai_governance_framework, and links expire after the profile Is create, so the tool is clearly something to call after starting. However, the description does not explicitly say 'use this after start...' or provide when-not-to.use guidance as alternatives.

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

All australian-ai-governance-framework toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The tools map to distinct workflow stages: start returns a session and questionnaire, submit saves the profile, and get retrieves the framework document. However, the phrase in start that it 'builds a governance framework' could make it seem to overlap with get, so it is not a perfect 5.

Naming Consistency5/5

All three tools use snake_case verb_noun naming: get_ai_governance_framework, start_australian...framework, and submit_ai_governance_profile. The naming pattern is predictable and clearly conveys each stage of the workflow.

Tool Count5/5

Three tools is a tight, well-scopt set for the stated purpose: begin a governance assessment, submit an organisation profile, and retrieve the resulting framework. Each tool has a distinct responsibility in the process.

Completeness4/5

The core lifecycle is covered: start, submit, and get, with re-submission overwitting a profile instead of creating duplicates. The main limitation is that the full framework is delivered externally via a paywall, so the agent cannot fully complete the purchase path without leaving the MCP workflow.

Resources