disclosure-compiler__get_framework

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return value (datapoints, mappings, sources, lineage) and implies low risk (read operation). However, it doesn't mention idempotency, rate limits, or error conditions like missing framework. Minimal behavioral context beyond safety.

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 sentence packed with key details: domain, frameworks, action (return), and return content. Front-loaded with domain and parentheses. No redundant words. Highly efficient.

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 retrieval tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns and its scope. However, it lacks details on error handling, required credentials, and how the returned data is structured. Still sufficient for basic use.

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?

The only parameter 'framework' has 0% schema description coverage. The description adds context by referring to 'one bundled framework', suggesting the parameter is a framework identifier. However, it does not specify valid values, format (e.g., string enum), or how to discover available frameworks. The addition is marginal.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: returning a bundled framework's required datapoints, mappings, sources, and lineage. It includes the domain (disclosure-compiler) and mentions specific frameworks (ESRS E1/SEC/IFRS S2/TNFD). 'One bundled framework' distinguishes it from listing tools like list_frameworks.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. While the description implies it is for retrieving details of a specific framework, it doesn't mention when to use other disclosure-compiler tools (e.g., compile_disclosure, list_frameworks). No when-not-to-use or prerequisite conditions.

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