WritersLogic business agents

contract-terminator

Dark Pattern Contract & Subscription Exit Lawyer — Paste a contract or Terms URL and get the decision first: send notice by a computed date, or the window has passed. Quotes auto-renewal, notice-window and early-termination traps verbatim, computes the renewal and last-notice dates in code, estimates the renewal cost you avoid from your fee, maps the exit to ROSCA, state automatic-renewal laws and EU/UK consumer law with links, and drafts a notice

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": {
      "vendorName": "<vendorName>",
      "userJurisdiction": "<userJurisdiction>",
      "reasonForExit": "<reasonForExit>"
    },
    "name": "contract-terminator"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`termsUrl`	No	Terms of Service or cancellation policy URL. Provide termsUrl or contractText.
`annualFee`	No	What you pay per year, USD, if billed annually. Use monthlyFee or annualFee.
`monthlyFee`	No	What you pay per month, USD. Used to compute the dollars at stake.
`vendorName`	Yes
`contractText`	No
`customerName`	No
`customerType`	No
`signupMethod`	No
`reasonForExit`	Yes
`userJurisdiction`	Yes	e.g. California, New York, EU (Germany), UK.
`accountIdentifier`	No
`contractStartDate`	No
`earlyTerminationFeeUsd`	No	Early-termination fee the vendor says you owe, USD, if any.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 15, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses several behavioral traits: quotes traps verbatim, computes dates in code, estimates cost from the fee, maps laws with links, and drafts a notice. However, it omits operational details such as whether it is read-only, how it handles inaccessible URLs, legal disclaimer limits, or data retention. For a legal-analysis tool with zero annotation coverage, this is adequate but incomplete.

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 dense but front-loads the core action ('Paste a contract or Terms URL and get the decision first') before enumerating capabilities. Each clause adds a distinct feature, so little is wasted. It could be split into shorter sentences or bullets for readability, but it remains efficient overall.

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?

Given 13 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description should be fairly complete. It covers the main workflow and outputs in prose, but it does not explain how most inputs are used or what the response format looks like. It is adequate for an agent to grasp the tool's purpose, but not fully sufficient to call it correctly with all required data.

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 38% across 13 parameters, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for termsUrl/contractText ('Paste a contract or Terms URL'), fees ('from your fee'), and jurisdiction ('ROSCA, state automatic-renewal laws and EU/UK consumer law'). But it leaves many parameters unexplained, including required fields vendorName and reasonForExit, plus customerType, signupMethod, contractStartDate, and earlyTerminationFeeUsd. This is a significant gap.

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 states a specific verb and resource: analyze a contract or Terms URL to determine subscription exit timing and draft notice. It lists concrete outputs like computed renewal dates, quoted traps, legal mapping, and notice drafting. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling 'contract-auditor', leaving some ambiguity about when this tool is preferred over that one.

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?

It provides clear usage context: 'Paste a contract or Terms URL and get the decision first: send notice by a computed date, or the window has passed.' This tells the agent the primary scenario—deciding whether a notice deadline is still open. It does not include when-not-to-use guidance or name alternative tools, so it falls short of a 5.

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

All WritersLogic business agents 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?