ampel

bafin_report_draft

Generate ITS 2024/1772 compliant BaFin incident report draft. All mandatory fields per DORA Art. 19/20. Preview mode — requires board approval.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "bafin_report_draft"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	No
`entity_id`	No
`root_cause`	No
`description`	No
`incident_id`	No
`remediation`	No
`report_type`	No	initial \| intermediate \| final
`classification`	No	major \| significant \| minor
`affected_clients`	No
`affected_services`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedMay 7, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description partially carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It explicitly states 'Preview mode' and 'requires board approval', which clarifies that it does not send the report and needs workflow approval. However, it does not mention side effects, persistence, authentication needs, or error behavior, leaving important gaps.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is very concise: two short sentences, with the main action front-loaded. Every word adds value, and there is no repetition of schema details.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool has 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficiently complete. It does not state what the tool returns (e.g., a draft document or status), whether it persists data, or how to handle required fields. The 'Preview mode' hint helps but is not enough to make the tool's behavior clear.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 20% (2 of 10 parameters have descriptions). The tool description does not explain individual parameters; 'All mandatory fields per DORA Art. 19/20' is a compliance statement but adds little about parameter meanings like title, entity_id, or remediation. This does not compensate for the poor schema coverage.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Generate ITS 2024/1772 compliant BaFin incident report draft.' It names a specific verb ('generate'), a specific resource ('BaFin incident report draft'), and regulatory context ('ITS 2024/1772'). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'bafin_approve_send' and generic 'generate_report'.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The phrase 'Preview mode — requires board approval' provides clear context that this tool produces a draft that must be approved before submission, implying it is not for final sending. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of a full 5.

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

All ampel tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?