Rekvira: EU regulation pinpoints for compliance AI

List my assessments

list_assessments

Read-onlyIdempotent

Sign-in required: call connect(email) and connect_verify first (free, one email) unless this connection is already signed in. List this trial_id's recorded assessments, newest first. Pass the trial_id from connect(). Use when resuming a multi-week DPIA or applicability review. Never invent rows for another trial.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max rows (1–100, default 50)
`session`	No	The `session` value the sign-in returned. Pass it on every call in this conversation, so the sign-in survives however this client handles connections; omit it when the user connected with Sign in (OAuth) or a key.
`trial_id`	No	trial_id returned by connect()
`max_chars`	No	Cap on the response size in characters (default 8000)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedSep 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / session

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "The `session` value the sign-in returned. Pass it on every call in this conversation, so the sign-in survives however this client handles connections; omit it when the user connected with Sign in (OAuth) or a key.",
+  "title": "Session"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedSep 24, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / max_chars

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "description": "Cap on the response size in characters (default 8000)",
+  "title": "Max Chars"
+}

First observedSep 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds real un-annotated context: an authentication prerequisite (connect/connect_verify), the newest-first ordering, and a scope guard against fabricating rows.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with the sign-in prerequisite before the actual behavior. No redundant filler, though the auth sentence is somewhat verbose.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must carry behavior; it covers auth, ordering, and scoping. It does not describe pagination or response shape, but for a simple read-only list with fully documented params this is close to sufficient.

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 each of the 4 params (limit, session, trial_id, max_chars) is documented in the schema. The description reinforces trial_id provenance ('from connect()') but adds little beyond what the schema already states, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('List this trial_id's recorded assessments') plus the ordering ('newest first'). This clearly distinguishes it from the write-oriented sibling record_assessment and from the workflow/regulation listers.

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?

Gives a concrete when-to-use context ('resuming a multi-week DPIA or applicability review') and a scope exclusion ('Never invent rows for another trial'). It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, but the intent is clear enough to route correctly.

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

All Rekvira: EU regulation pinpoints for compliance AI 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.

Resources

Need Help?