list_compliance_frameworks

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

No annotations are provided, but the description adds 'Read-only; no side effects' and clarifies that both built-in and custom frameworks are returned. This covers safety and scope adequately for a list tool.

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?

Three sentences with each earning its place: purpose, behavior/return content, and usage context. No redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool, this covers purpose, return content, and relationship to sibling tools. The missing parameter explanation and reliance on an output schema (not shown) keep it just short of a 5.

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 coverage is 0% and the description only vaguely references a 'version guard'. It does not explain the server_version parameter's meaning or accepted values, leaving the agent underinformed about this required input.

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?

Description states 'List the compliance frameworks available to map controls against' – a specific verb and resource. It also differentiates from siblings by noting typical use before select_compliance_frameworks and import_compliance_framework.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to discover framework identifiers before select_compliance_frameworks or import_compliance_framework', giving clear when-to-use context and naming alternative tools.

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