Skip to main content
Glama

Probative legal-marketing data

by com.probativegrowth
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Lawyer advertising rules for one state

get_state_rules
Read-onlyIdempotent

Every lawyer advertising rule we track for one US state or DC (ad filing, required content, waiting periods, claims and testimonials, referral and lead rules, other languages, call recording, texting law, privacy law), each with its plain-English text, status (P primary source, S secondary, D ABA model default, U open question), sources with the days they were read, and the state page URL to cite. Not legal advice.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
stateYesTwo-letter code (TX), or DC. Full names (Texas) also work.
detailNosummary (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.summary

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
metaYesCredit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite
nextCursorNoPass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page
provenanceYesWhere 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

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / detail
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "summary",
+  "description": "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.",
+  "enum": [
+    "summary",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / nextCursor
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page",
+  "type": [
+    "string",
+    "null"
+  ]
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / provenance
      Added value: +{
+  "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"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "meta"
-]New value: +[
+  "meta",
+  "provenance"
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral value beyond that: a legend for the status codes (P primary source, S secondary, D ABA model default, U open question), the presence of source read-dates and a citable page URL, and a 'Not legal advice' caveat. It does not mention response size or whether all topics are always present for every state.

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 scope statement is front-loaded before the topic list, so the reader knows what they get in the first clause. The long parenthetical inventory is dense but each item is a genuinely differentiator for the tool; only minor trimming would improve it.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Output schema exists, annotations are rich, and both parameters are fully documented in the schema, so the description need not explain return shapes. It still covers scope, topic coverage, status-code semantics and the legal disclaimer — everything an agent needs to select and call it correctly.

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 both parameters are documented there, including the two-letter/full-name flexibility and the summary-vs-full tradeoff. The description mentions 'plain-English text, status, sources and page URL', which loosely maps to the detail levels but adds no syntax or format guidance beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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+resource with clear scope: 'Every lawyer advertising rule we track for one US state or DC', then enumerates the covered topics (ad filing, waiting periods, claims and testimonials, texting law, etc.). An agent can tell this is a state-level aggregate rather than a single-rule fetch, though it never names siblings like get_rule or search_rules to sharpen the boundary.

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 phrase 'for one US state or DC' implies the usage context (per-jurisdiction lookup) and 'Every ... rule we track' implies completeness, so an agent can infer when it fits. But there is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion, and no pointer to alternatives such as get_rule or compare_states for the adjacent jobs.

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 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