Retrieve one subgoal (framework normative content + Pattern layer guidance) by pattern_id (e.g., 'D3::idx2::sandboxing') or display_id (e.g., 'D3.2'). display_id may resolve to multiple subgoals — underlined variants share display_ids.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ||
| include_pattern | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Explains retrieval and ID resolution but does not mention error handling or response format for multiple matches.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and examples, no wasted words. Efficient and clear.
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?
Covers ID formats and subgoal content but omits return structure or error behavior. Without output schema, this is a notable gap, yet the tool is simple and context from siblings helps.
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 has no descriptions for parameters (0% coverage). Description explains 'id' parameter well with examples but does not clarify 'include_pattern' (boolean, default true). Partial compensation.
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 it retrieves one subgoal by specific IDs, with examples and content description. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like search or list.
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?
Provides ID format examples and notes display_id may yield multiple results, giving clear context for usage. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives but context is sufficient.
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.
Each tool has a distinct purpose: finding patterns, cross-references, operational heuristics, requirements, listing, searching, and review stats. Overlap is minimal and well-differentiated by input parameters.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case, e.g., find_patterns_for_task, list_requirements, resolve_id. No mixing of conventions or vague verbs.
12 tools cover core operations (list, get, search, resolve, review) for the framework domain without bloat. Each tool serves a clear, non-redundant purpose.
Covers most needed operations for exploring the framework: listing suites, searching patterns, getting details, cross-references, review stats. Lacks a direct 'list all patterns' tool, but list_requirements and search_patterns partially fill that gap.
