BackPR youth program data

Compare states by rule

list_states_by_rule

Read-onlyIdempotent

List the US states (and DC) that match one rule in BackPR's state rules data: every person must report suspected child abuse; camps need a state license (all camp types, only some or none statewide); or the staff-to-child ratio for school-age children, 3-year-olds or 4-year-olds in licensed childcare centers. Use it for questions like "Which states require everyone to report abuse?" or "Which state has the strictest school-age ratio?". Returns each matching state with its value and backpr.com links. Ratio rules list every state with a confirmed ratio, strictest first; the others list matching states by name.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "rule": "<rule>"
    },
    "name": "list_states_by_rule"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rule`	Yes	"everyone_must_report": states where every person must report suspected child abuse. "camp_license_required": day and overnight camps need a state license. "camp_license_partial": only some camp types need one. "no_statewide_camp_license": no statewide camp license. "school_age_ratio", "ratio_3_year_olds", "ratio_4_year_olds": staff-to-child ratios in licensed centers.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	Yes
`rule`	Yes
`count`	Yes
`label`	Yes
`states`	Yes
`checked`	Yes
`cite_as`	Yes
`source_url`	Yes	The backpr.com national page for this rule
`not_confirmed`	No	Ratio rules only: states without a confirmed ratio

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 22, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description still adds useful non-obvious behavior: results carry the matched value plus backpr.com links, and ratio queries return all confirmed states sorted strictest-first while other rules return name-ordered matches. That ordering detail is genuinely informative beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded: it leads with what is listed, then rule coverage, then example questions, then return ordering. Every sentence contributes, though the rule enumeration partially duplicates the enum descriptions in the schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present the description need not explain result shape, yet it still covers result ordering and the accompanying links, and annotations carry the safety profile. For a single-enum read tool this is essentially complete, with only the sibling relationship left implicit.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single enum parameter fully documents all seven rule values, so the schema carries the burden and the baseline is 3. The prose restates the rule categories rather than adding syntax or edge-case meaning the enum does not already contain.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('List the US states (and DC) that match one rule') and enumerates the three rule domains it covers, so an agent knows exactly what is returned. It effectively distinguishes itself by direction from get_state_rules (state→rules vs. rule→states), but it never names that sibling, so the differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It supplies concrete trigger questions ('Which states require everyone to report abuse?', 'Which state has the strictest school-age ratio?'), which gives clear context for when to reach for this tool. It stops short of naming an alternative or stating when NOT to use it, so it does not reach the top band.

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

All BackPR youth program data tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?