list_compliance_frameworks

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

The description implies a read-only operation by listing frameworks, but with no annotations to confirm, it relies on inference. It discloses the output includes 'status' but does not detail behavior beyond listing. Adequate, not explicit.

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 concise sentence of 10 words clearly conveys the tool's purpose with no wasted words. Efficiently structured for quick consumption.

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?

With no output schema, the description does not clarify the return format or what 'status' entails. The presence of many sibling tools suggests the need for more context, but the description is minimally adequate for a simple list tool.

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 100% and each parameter has a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the verb 'List' and resource 'compliance frameworks' with detail 'with their status', making the tool's function explicit. It is specific enough to understand the core action, though it could better differentiate from sibling tools like 'compliance_status_overview'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given siblings like 'compliance_status_overview' that may serve similar purposes, the absence of usage context makes selection ambiguous.

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