Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Opedd — Licensed Content for AI

by com.opedd
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get your compliance dossier

get_compliance_dossier
Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the account's compliance dossier for a period: one row per licensed article, with article metadata, licence terms, public-record attestation and compliance flags (CDSM Article 4(3) and text-and-data-mining reservations). At most 90 days per call; longer periods are paginated with _meta.next_cursor. Each call is recorded in the account's audit log. Requires a buyer API key with the 'audit' scope, a buyer session, or the Opedd connector sign-in.

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": {
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>"
    },
    "name": "get_compliance_dossier"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toYesISO 8601 timestamp upper bound (inclusive). Window cap 90 days.
fromYesISO 8601 timestamp lower bound (inclusive)
cursorNoOpaque cursor for pagination

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is settled. The description goes well beyond that by disclosing the 90-day per-call cap, the _meta.next_cursor continuation mechanism, that every call is written to the account's audit log, and the exact auth requirements (buyer API key with 'audit' scope, buyer session, or connector sign-in) – all things an agent cannot get 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?

Three dense sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded and constraints and auth trailing. Every sentence carries information, though the middle clause about pagination partially duplicates the schema and could be trimmed.

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 read-only reporting tool with no output schema, the description supplies the row grain, the pagination contract, the audit-log side effect and all three auth paths – enough to call it correctly. It stops short of describing field-level guarantees or what an empty dossier looks like, which keeps it from a 5.

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 coverage is 100% and both the 90-day cap and the opaque cursor are already documented in the schema itself, so the description mostly restates them. It adds no extra format or boundary nuance beyond what the parameter descriptions provide, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb-resource pair ('Returns the account's compliance dossier for a period') and then enumerates the row grain and contents (article metadata, licence terms, attestation, compliance flags). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_audit_events and verify_license without the agent needing to open a schema.

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 description implies the compliance-reporting context and states hard constraints (90-day window, pagination), but never says when to prefer this tool over get_audit_events or verify_license, and no alternatives are named. Usage is inferable but not explicit.

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

All Opedd — Licensed Content for AI toolsInspect
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