disclosure-compiler__list_frameworks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the returned fields but does not mention the return format (e.g., a list), potential side effects (none expected), or any other behavioral traits. For a read-only list tool, the description is moderately transparent.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with a domain context prefix in brackets. It is concise and contains no superfluous words.

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 adequately enumerates the returned fields (framework IDs, coverage, lineage, version, digest). However, it could explicitly state that this returns a list of such items, which is implied but not clear.

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?

There are no parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. The description does not add parameter information, but none is needed. Per guidelines, 0 parameters receive a baseline of 4.

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 tool lists bundled framework IDs, coverage, source lineage, version, and digest. The verb 'list' is specific, and the resource 'frameworks' is well-defined. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_framework (which retrieves a specific framework) and compile_disclosure (which creates a disclosure).

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 implicitly positions this as the starting point to see available frameworks before using compile_disclosure or get_framework. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria.

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