Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Syfert Legal Research

by com.syfert
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Upload a long brief for check_brief

brief_upload

Signed-in accounts only (a free account at https://syfert.com/mcp/; anonymous callers use check_brief with text). Upload a brief of any length for check_brief, in pieces. Send the text in order, about 40,000 characters (10k tokens) per call: the first call returns brief_id; each next call passes brief_id and seq (2, 3, ...); the last passes final=true (a short brief can go in one call with final=true). Then call check_brief with brief_id. The text and its results are held in server RAM only, for your credential alone, and are deleted right after the last page of every section is read, after an hour idle, or by brief_delete.

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": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "brief_upload"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
seqNoOptional: this piece's number (1, 2, ...). A repeated seq with the same text is acknowledged once, so a retried call is safe
textYesThe next piece of the brief, exactly as it continues (pieces are joined with nothing in between)
finalNotrue on the last piece: closes the upload
brief_idNoOmit on the first call; then the brief_id the first call returned

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added
  2. Removed
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only say this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write. The description adds substantially beyond that: per-credential isolation, RAM-only storage, and three distinct deletion triggers (last page of every section read, one hour idle, brief_delete). That is exactly the lifecycle context an agent needs before uploading proprietary text.

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?

One dense paragraph with no filler sentences; the auth constraint, chunk size, protocol, and retention policy all earn their place. Slight weakness: it leads with the access restriction rather than the core action, pushing the actual purpose to the second clause.

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?

For a stateful multi-call upload with no output schema, everything essential is covered: eligibility, chunking, sequencing, termination, the follow-up call, and data retention. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3, but the description adds meaning the schema lacks: a concrete chunk size (~40,000 characters / 10k tokens per call), the ordering rule that pieces are concatenated in sequence, and the fact that a short brief can be a single call with final=true. It also states the first call's return value (brief_id), which is not in any structured field.

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 ('Upload a brief of any length ... in pieces') and ties it to the sibling that consumes the result ('for check_brief'). An agent can distinguish this from check_brief with text without opening either schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives explicit routing: signed-in accounts only, anonymous callers must use check_brief with text instead. It also lays out the call sequence (first call returns brief_id, middle calls pass brief_id+seq, last sets final=true, then call check_brief with brief_id), so when-to-use and how-to-chain are both spelled out.

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

All Syfert Legal Research 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