Spain Legal by Legal Fournier

Get Visa Options

get_visa_options

Read-onlyIdempotent

Rank Spain residence routes using evergreen logic and return decision traces, next actions, and canonical MCP resources for the leading branches.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`intent`	Yes	Main relocation intent.
`nationality`	Yes	Applicant nationality as a country name or ISO-style country code.
`income_source`	Yes	Main source of income for the move.
`employer_location`	No	Where the main employer or client base is located, if known.
`has_eu_family_link`	No	Whether an EU family-member route may need separate review.
`investment_profile`	No	Whether the investment plan is passive or tied to an operating business.
`has_spanish_job_offer`	No	Whether the applicant already has a Spanish job offer.
`eu_family_relationship`	No	Optional relationship label when an EU-family route may be relevant.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`references`	Yes	Secondary Legal Fournier references, demoted behind MCP-native context.
`next_actions`	Yes	Next actions to progress the analysis.
`review_level`	Yes	How much human review is still advisable before treating the result as filing-ready.
`general_notes`	Yes	General notes that apply across the route list.
`ranked_routes`	Yes	Ranked visa or residence routes.
`decision_trace`	Yes	Structured trace of the main route-selection factors.
`profile_summary`	Yes	One-line summary of the screened profile.
`ruled_out_routes`	Yes	Common routes ruled out by stable legal logic.
`key_rules_applied`	Yes	Stable rules that drove the recommendation.
`related_resource_uris`	Yes	Canonical MCP resources an agent can read next without leaving the server.
`official_legal_sources`	Yes	Official legal sources that anchor the recommendation.
`suggested_follow_up_tools`	Yes	Tool calls that are likely to advance the analysis.
`current_verification_flags`	Yes	Live-verification warnings for volatile or fact-sensitive points.
`nationality_classification`	Yes	High-level nationality bucket used by the route logic.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable detail about what is returned: decision traces, next actions, and canonical MCP resources. It does not mention edge cases or limitations, but given the strong annotations, this is sufficient.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single, dense sentence that front-loads the primary action and enumerates the three key outputs. Every word earns its place; 'evergreen logic' is slightly idiomatic but not wasteful.

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 8 parameters, full schema coverage, and a rich output schema, the description provides enough context for an agent to invoke the tool correctly: it names the purpose, the outputs, and implicitly the inputs via the schema. It could further distinguish itself from get_residency_path, but that is a minor gap.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description itself does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so no higher score is warranted.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's core action: 'Rank Spain residence routes' and specifies exact outputs (decision traces, next actions, canonical MCP resources). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_residency_path, which likely returns a single path rather than a ranked set of options.

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?

The description makes it evident the tool is for ranking Spain residence routes based on inputs like nationality, income source, and intent. However, it does not explicitly describe when not to use it or name alternatives, though the purpose strongly implies its use case.

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

All Spain Legal by Legal Fournier tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but get_paid_call_availability and get_paid_consultation_options overlap somewhat: one reads live availability for the 45-minute call while the other covers broader consultation options including that same call. This minor overlap is manageable given the clear descriptions.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming follows a consistent verb_noun pattern (check_, compare_, create_, explain_, get_, route_, run_) with only minor deviations like the verbose 'create_legal_fournier_contact_request' and the slightly odd 'get_paid_call_availability'. Overall readable and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

The 11 tools are well-scoped for a Spain legal advisory server, covering eligibility, comparison, process explanation, visa/residency guidance, and client engagement. This is an appropriate size that avoids bloat while providing a complete service.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the core domain well: Beckham regime checks, tax comparison, NIE process, visa/residency guidance, and Legal Fournier consultation/contact flows. Missing are transactional tools like booking directly or tracking requests, but the paid consultation options provide endpoints for those actions, so agents can work around gaps.

Resources

Need Help?