Digital technologies are widely promoted as essential tools for preparing students for a data-driven society. However, in mathematics education, their integration poses distinct challenges due to the discipline’s emphasis on abstraction, symbolic reasoning, and representational fluency. While popular frameworks such as TPACK, SAMR, and RAT offer general guidance on digital integration, their epistemic neutrality limits their relevance for mathematics instruction regarding mathematical meaning and practice. This conceptual paper critically evaluates eight dominant technology integration frameworks, identifies theoretical blind spots, and proposes discipline-sensitive alternatives. Through a comparative conceptual analysis, this chapter draws on instrumental genesis, instrumental orchestration, and the Anthropological Theory of the Didactic to assess how current models engage with the cognitive and epistemological demands of mathematics education. The analysis reveals that most frameworks prioritise tool usage over conceptual understanding, neglecting how digital technologies mediate access to mathematical meaning. The key gaps include weak attention to task design, representational coherence, and instructional alignment. To address these shortcomings, this study proposes a hybrid framework that positions digital tools as mediators of mathematical meaning rather than as generic enhancers of mathematics instruction. Anchored in didactic theory, the model offers five guiding principles: epistemic alignment, representational orchestration, didactic–technical reflexivity, instrumental and didactic coherence, and equity- and access-sensitive integration. The framework is conceived as a normative–analytical model to guide mathematics teachers and researchers in designing, evaluating, and theorising the use of digital technology. While it may inform curriculum and policy decisions, its central contribution lies in offering a discipline-sensitive structure for instructional design and for educational research.