get_law_historyFull change history for one law record — every observed snapshot (ascending), with what changed and the values at each point. Paid feature (Developer+): anon/free receive a 403 with an upgrade hint, which is returned verbatim. Data by AI Law Tracker (CC BY 4.0). Informational only — not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The record uuid. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Adds beyond annotations: snapshots ascending, 403 behavior, data license, and disclaimer. No contradictions with annotations which already declare safe read-only.
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?
Two sentences efficiently covering output, access limits, source, and legal disclaimer. No redundancy.
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 no output schema, description effectively explains output. Could detail format (array of snapshots) but sufficient. Annotations cover safety.
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?
Single parameter 'id' with schema description 'The record uuid.' Schema coverage is 100%, so description adds little extra. Baseline 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?
Clearly states it returns full change history for one law record with ascending snapshots including changes and values. Distinct from siblings like get_ai_law which gets current state.
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?
Explicitly notes it's a paid feature and that anon/free users get a 403. Info-only disclaimer. Does not explicitly compare to siblings but purpose is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.