Retrieve compliance findings from a completed GuardBee scan by scan ID, with optional severity filtering. Use framework labels for KVKK, GDPR, or CCPA reports.
Get compliance findings from a completed GuardBee scan, optionally filtered by severity
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| scanId | Yes | Scan ID returned by check_compliance | |
| severity | No | Filter by severity | |
| framework | No | Framework label for the report header |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only retrieval and the description discloses the precondition that a scan must be completed, which is genuine behavioral context. It omits any details on pagination, result size, or behavior when findings are absent.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with the core action first and the optional filter trailing. No wasted words, though the brevity contributes to the coverage gaps noted elsewhere rather than being optimally informative.
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?
Three parameters, no output schema, and no annotations means the description must do more work. It conveys the retrieval purpose and the scan prerequisite, but says nothing about the shape of returned findings and drops the framework filter, leaving an agent to infer the response and one of the filter dimensions.
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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only mentions the severity filter and entirely omits the framework parameter, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema and even under-describes the available filters.
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?
States a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('compliance findings') and names the source ('a completed GuardBee scan'), so it is distinguishable from siblings like check_compliance, which runs a scan. However, it does not explicitly contrast itself with check_compliance/list_requirements, so sibling differentiation is only implicit.
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?
The phrase 'from a completed GuardBee scan' plus the schema note that scanId comes from check_compliance implies the prerequisite workflow (run check_compliance first). But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use or statement of alternatives among the compliance_checker siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.