ClevSec EU compliance tools

DORA readiness gap assessment

dora_gap_assessment

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use to assess how ready a financial entity is for DORA, or to find its gaps. Call without answers to get the 39 questions in five pillars (ICT risk management, incident management, resilience testing, ICT third-party risk, information sharing), each with its DORA article. Call with answers (yes, partial, no per question id) to get a score per pillar, an overall readiness level and the gaps.

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": "dora_gap_assessment"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`answers`	No	Question id to answer, e.g. {"p1_1": "yes", "p2_3": "partial"}. Unanswered questions count as gaps.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish the safe read-only, idempotent, closed-world profile, so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: mode-dependent output (question set vs. scored pillars/readiness level), and the rule that unanswered questions count as 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?

Three tight sentences with no filler: the purpose and each invocation mode are front-loaded, and every clause carries actionable information. Nothing repeats the annotations or schema verbatim.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must convey returns - and it does, for both modes (39 questions across five named pillars with DORA articles; per-pillar scores, overall readiness level and gaps). Combined with annotations covering safety, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

With 100% schema coverage the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that the parameter is optional and controls the mode ('call without answers'), and by restating the yes/partial/no semantics that drive scoring and gap counting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('assess how ready a financial entity is for DORA, or find its gaps') and details the two operating modes. It does not, however, name or distinguish itself from the many similar siblings (dora_checklist, nis2_gap_assessment, iso27001_gap_assessment), so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Gives clear when-to-use context and even specifies the two invocation paths: 'Call without answers to get the 39 questions' versus 'Call with answers ... to get a score per pillar'. It stops short of naming alternatives such as dora_checklist or dora_remediation_plan for users who need a different DORA artifact.

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

All ClevSec EU compliance tools 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?