Probative legal-marketing data

Calculate the legal limit on an attorney fee

calculate_fee_cap

Read-onlyIdempotent

The most a lawyer may charge, in dollars, on one award, settlement or past-due benefit under a legal fee cap.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`stage`	No	Optional: the stage, e.g. "administrative" or "litigation"…
`program`	Yes
`award_usd`	Yes	The award, settlement or past-due benefits in US dollars (the…
`jurisdiction`	Yes	Two-letter state code, DC, or US for federal programs (Social…
`response_format`	No		concise

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 28, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / detail

Removed value: -{
-  "default": "summary",
-  "enum": [
-    "summary",
-    "full"
-  ],
-  "type": "string"
-}

addedInput schema / properties / response_format

Added value: +{
+  "default": "concise",
+  "enum": [
+    "concise",
+    "detailed"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed6 schema fields changedOct 28, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / award_usd / description

Previous value: -"The award, settlement or past-due benefits in US dollars (the base the rule names)"New value: +"The award, settlement or past-due benefits in US dollars (the…"

removedInput schema / properties / detail / description

Removed value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance."

changedInput schema / properties / jurisdiction / description

Previous value: -"Two-letter state code, DC, or US for federal programs (Social Security, FTCA, VA)"New value: +"Two-letter state code, DC, or US for federal programs (Social…"

removedInput schema / properties / program / description

Removed value: -"workers-comp, med-mal, contingency-general, ssdi-ssi, ftca, va, longshore or other"

changedInput schema / properties / stage / description

Previous value: -"Optional: the stage, e.g. \"administrative\" or \"litigation\" (FTCA), \"agency\" or \"court\" (Social Security), \"before answer\" (Florida)"New value: +"Optional: the stage, e.g. \"administrative\" or \"litigation\"…"

removedOutput schema / properties

Removed value: -{
-  "meta": {
-    "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite",
-    "required": [
-      "attribution",
-      "license",
-      "disclaimer",
-      "notice"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  "nextCursor": {
-    "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page",
-    "type": [
-      "string",
-      "null"
-    ]
-  },
-  "provenance": {
-    "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved",
-    "properties": {
-      "citeUrl": {
-        "description": "The page to cite",
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "dataset": {
-        "description": "Dataset id",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "datasetTitle": {
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "dateChecked": {
-        "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source",
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "doi": {
-        "description": "Version DOI",
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "doiUrl": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "line": {
-        "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "publisher": {
-        "description": "Publisher of the dataset",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "recordId": {
-        "description": "Stable id of the record",
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "retrievedAt": {
-        "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "source": {
-        "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy",
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "sourceKind": {
-        "description": "primary or secondary",
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "sourceUrl": {
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "status": {
-        "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question",
-        "type": [
-          "string",
-          "null"
-        ]
-      },
-      "version": {
-        "description": "Dataset version",
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "publisher",
-      "dataset",
-      "version",
-      "retrievedAt"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-}

AddedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds useful scope by saying the result is a dollar maximum for one award, settlement, or past-due benefit, but it does not add much beyond that about calculation behavior or limitations.

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 compact sentence with no wasted wording. It is front-loaded with the core result: the maximum dollar charge under a legal fee cap.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so return values and side effects do not need to be repeated. However, the description leaves important contextual gaps around when to use this tool versus get_attorney_fee_caps and what the required jurisdiction/program inputs mean.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 60%, and the description does not compensate for the gaps. It mentions the award/settlement/past-due benefit concept but says nothing about required parameters such as jurisdiction or program, nor about stage or response_format.

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 identifies a specific resource and scope: the maximum dollar amount a lawyer may charge on one award, settlement, or past-due benefit under a legal fee cap. It is clear about what is being returned, but it does not explicitly distinguish this calculation tool from the sibling get_attorney_fee_caps.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance and does not name alternatives. In particular, it does not tell the agent when to calculate a cap here versus retrieving fee-cap rules via get_attorney_fee_caps.

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

All Probative legal-marketing 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.