Start here: understand the complete BrunoSan Intelligence network.
Returns every intelligence domain, the LENS cross-domain layer, canonical
MCP endpoints, human documentation, evidence doctrine, current access
summary and concrete next actions. This is intentionally richer than a
directory so an agent can decide whether BrunoSan can satisfy its goal.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states this is a return-only discovery operation and lists the output categories, including access summary and next actions. It does not explicitly state side-effect safety or access prerequisites, but a zero-parameter discovery tool is already well characterized.
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 front-loaded with 'Start here' and uses three compact sentences with no filler. Every clause adds value: purpose, returned content, and why it is richer than a directory.
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 empty input schema and no output schema, the description covers the main categories an agent needs: domains, LENS layer, endpoints, documentation, doctrine, access, and next actions. It could be more explicit about return format or error behavior, but for a discovery entry point it is sufficiently complete.
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 tool has zero parameters and an empty schema, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly focuses on what the tool returns rather than attempting to document nonexistent parameters.
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 opens with 'Start here' and 'understand the complete BrunoSan Intelligence network', giving a specific purpose and resource. It enumerates the returned content and explicitly contrasts itself with a directory, distinguishing it from sibling list_intelligence_domains.
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?
'Start here' clearly establishes this as the entry point for deciding whether BrunoSan can satisfy a goal. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives to avoid, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.