get_compliance_plans

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a read-only list operation ('Get all') and provides domain context about compliance plans, but it does not disclose pagination, filtering behavior, or whether the results include only active plans.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence adds meaningful context. There is no verbose or redundant content.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters) and the presence of an output schema, the description reasonably covers the entity type and the action. It lacks explicit usage guidance, but that is handled in the usage_guidelines dimension and does not materially hurt completeness.

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?

This tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds semantic value by defining what compliance plans are, which helps the agent understand the returned entities, even though there are no parameter details to explain.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'compliance plans' and states the scope 'all', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like run_compliance_plan (executes plans) and describe_compliance_report (describes a single report).

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 description explains what compliance plans are but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus running or describing compliance plans. It does not mention alternatives or situations where this tool should or should not be used.

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