Skip to main content
Glama

Lintelly HR Deutschland

Vertragsbausteine suchen

vertragsbausteine_suchen
Read-onlyIdempotent

Germany only. Search 127 German employment contract clauses (Vertragsbausteine), e.g. home office (Homeoffice), overtime (Überstunden), bonus, company car (Dienstwagen), non-compete (Wettbewerbsverbot), probation (Probezeit). Returns matching clauses with key and when they fit, and void clause types from the red list with the reason and the safe alternative.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
suchtextYesWhat the clause should cover, German works best, e.g. Homeoffice
vertragsartNoType of contract, default arbeitsvertrag

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
standYes
fallenNo
hinweisYes
quellenYes
ergebnisYesResult of the tool; its fields differ per tool
rechenwegNo
herausgeberYes
naechster_schrittNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "ergebnis": {
      +      "description": "Result of the tool; its fields differ per tool"
      +    },
      +    "fallen": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "type": "string"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "herausgeber": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "hinweis": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "naechster_schritt": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "type": "string"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "quellen": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "properties": {
      +          "geprueft_am": {
      +            "type": [
      +              "string",
      +              "null"
      +            ]
      +          },
      +          "grund": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "norm": {
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "status": {
      +            "enum": [
      +              "bestätigt",
      +              "noch nicht bestätigt",
      +              "Prüfung überfällig"
      +            ],
      +            "type": "string"
      +          },
      +          "url": {
      +            "type": [
      +              "string",
      +              "null"
      +            ]
      +          }
      +        },
      +        "required": [
      +          "norm"
      +        ],
      +        "type": "object"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "rechenweg": {
      +      "items": {
      +        "type": "string"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "stand": {
      +      "type": "string"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "ergebnis",
      +    "quellen",
      +    "hinweis",
      +    "stand",
      +    "herausgeber"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value by describing the return payload (matching clauses with key and fit, plus void clause types with reason and safe alternative), which is not derivable from 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the geographic constraint and then the corpus size and return behavior. The parenthetical example list is somewhat long but each term aids query formulation, so little is wasted.

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?

For a two-parameter, read-only search tool with a full input schema and an output schema, the description covers scope, corpus, and result shape adequately. Only the missing sibling routing and the contract-type parameter's effect on results leave a small 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description expands the example vocabulary (Homeoffice, Überstunden, Dienstwagen, Wettbewerbsverbot, Probezeit), slightly enriching how to phrase `suchtext`, but says nothing about the `vertragsart` enum values beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

States a specific verb (Search) and resource (127 German employment contract clauses) with concrete domain examples. Clear enough to distinguish from most siblings, though it never addresses the near-identical sibling `vertragsbaustein` (singular) or `klausel_pruefen`, so the differentiation is not fully explicit.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The 'Germany only' scope and the examples imply when this tool is relevant, and the mention of void/red-list clauses hints at its advisory purpose. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no routing to alternatives such as `vertragsbaustein` or `klausel_pruefen`.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.