Skip to main content
Glama

Export Control

by dev.toolstop

Expand a reason-for-control code

explain_reason_code
Read-only

Expand a reason-for-control code such as NS, AT or CB into its full name. Use this when reading a Control List entry or a chart column and the two-letter code is not obvious. Returns the code and the name it stands for, or the whole glossary when called with no argument. This is a glossary lookup only: it reports what a code means, never whether that control applies to anything you are shipping, and it cannot tell you whether a licence is required.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoA two-letter reason code, e.g. NS. Omit to list all of them.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
codeNoThe code, uppercased.
nameNoWhat the code stands for.
codesNoEvery known code, when none was given.
statusYesOutcome of the lookup.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, it discloses the output behavior (returns code and name, or whole glossary when no argument) and explicitly states it cannot judge control applicability or license requirements.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then usage, then return and limitations; no redundant words.

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 simple lookup tool with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, usage, return values, and limitations; the output schema exists to detail further, so nothing is missing.

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?

The schema already describes the 'code' parameter with 100% coverage, so the description's main added value is concrete examples and clarifying the no-argument behavior; it reinforces but does not significantly extend the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Expand') and resource ('reason-for-control code'), provides concrete examples (NS, AT, CB), and explicitly distinguishes itself from license-checking tools by stating it is a glossary lookup only.

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?

It explicitly states when to use ('when reading a Control List entry or a chart column and the two-letter code is not obvious') and clearly excludes license determination, preventing misuse in favor of tools like check_export_license.

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

All Export Control toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct role: check_export_license combines ECCN and country for a verdict, lookup_eccn provides entry details, lookup_country provides destination chart rows, and explain_reason_code expands code definitions. There is no overlap that would cause an agent to select the wrong tool.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: check_export_license, explain_reason_code, lookup_country, lookup_eccn. The convention is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

Four tools is well-scoped for the focused purpose of export control license determination. Each tool earns its place as part of a coherent workflow, and the count is within the ideal range.

Completeness5/5

For the stated scope (Commerce Country Chart-based license checking), the tool set covers the full workflow: look up ECCN, look up country, check license, and expand reason codes. The descriptions explicitly note limitations, so there are no surprising gaps within the server's intended domain.

Resources