Skip to main content
Glama

legal_subscriptions

Rules on subscription sign-up, auto-renewal, cancellation, and total-price display across US federal, US states, EU, UK, France and Germany — with the numbers: how many days before renewal a reminder is due, how many clicks cancellation may take, what must be in the price. Critically, it records that the FTC’s "Click-to-Cancel" rule was vacated on 2025-07-08 before it ever took effect, along with the vacated DOT ancillary-fee rule and the twice-delayed UK subscription regime. A model working from training data will assert all three as live law. Free — this call costs nothing. No account or payment required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
searchNoFree-text over summary, instrument and detail.
statusNoFilter to one lifecycle state.
dead_onlyNoReturn only rules that are NOT live law — vacated, superseded, or still proposed. These are the rules most often wrongly believed to be in force.
jurisdictionNoSubstring match, e.g. "EU", "UK", "US-federal", "California", "Germany".
verified_onlyNoOnly rows whose source URL resolved when last checked. Off by default: many primary sources (courts, national gazettes) block automated checkers, so "blocked" is not "bad".

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the call is free, no account needed, and notes that the data includes vacated rules often wrongly believed live. However, it does not mention rate limits or pagination behavior.

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 description is a concise single paragraph that front-loads the tool's purpose, then provides specifics. While not highly structured, it is efficient and avoids redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's complexity with 6 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the domain, including key exceptions and intent. It lacks details on return format and pagination but is otherwise complete for selection purposes.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 83%. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that the data includes specific numbers (e.g., days for reminders, clicks for cancellation) and highlighting the dead_only filter's purpose. It enriches parameter understanding.

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?

The description clearly states the tool provides rules on subscription sign-up, auto-renewal, cancellation, and total-price display across multiple jurisdictions, with specific numbers and a notable vacated rule. It distinguishes itself from sibling legal tools by focusing on subscription-specific regulations.

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 tool is for querying subscription law rules and states it's free and requires no account, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

All 20 tools have clearly distinct purposes, grouped by domain prefixes (content_ai, design_ai, legal, psych, ref, tollmint, web). Even similar-sounding tools like psych_dark-pattern-detect and psych_dark-patterns are differentiated as a live scanner versus a reference taxonomy. No two tools overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming mostly follows a prefix_descriptive pattern, but some tools use hyphens (content_ai-score, design_ai-slop-detect) while others use underscores (legal_accessibility, psych_biases). This minor inconsistency prevents a perfect score, but the pattern is still clear and readable.

Tool Count4/5

20 tools is slightly above the typical 'well-scoped' range, but each tool serves a specific, justifiable need across multiple domains (legal, psychology, content analysis, geocoding, internal). The count feels comprehensive rather than bloated.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers all major areas implied by the domain prefixes: comprehensive legal compliance references, extensive psychology/behavioral design tools, content and design analysis, geocoding, and internal server management. No obvious gaps for the intended use cases.

Resources