Skip to main content
Glama

Export Control

by dev.toolstop

Read a Control List entry's reasons for control

lookup_eccn
Read-only

Look up one ECCN on the Commerce Control List and return its title, its reasons for control, and the chart column each reason maps to. Use this to understand why an item is controlled, or to see the scope caveats before relying on a licence answer, since a control often applies to only some sub-paragraphs of an entry. Some entries are not decided by the country chart at all, and those return chartDetermined: false with the requirement text instead, or indeterminate when the entry carries no chart control at all. Knowing an entry's reasons for control does not tell you whether a licence is required for a destination; pass the ECCN to check_export_license for that. This tool cannot tell you whether an item falls under this ECCN.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eccnYesExport Control Classification Number, e.g. 5A002.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
eccnNoThe normalised ECCN.
titleNoThe entry heading as published.
statusYesOutcome of the lookup. Only `ok` carries an answer. `embargoed` means the chart does not govern the destination. `indeterminate` means the entry has no country-chart control in this data and the chart cannot answer for it, which is not the same as no licence being required. `ambiguous_country` means the name matched more than one row and you must ask which was meant.
reasonsNoReason-for-control codes on the entry, with their expanded names.
controlsNoEach control, its scope text, and the chart column or other requirement it maps to.
chartDeterminedNoWhether any control on this entry is decided by the country chart.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds substantial behavioral nuance beyond that: it explains the various return shapes (chartDetermined false with requirement text, or indeterminate when no chart control), and warns about scope caveats (control often applies to only some sub-paragraphs). It also discloses what the tool cannot do, which is transparent.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core function, then usage, then edge cases, then the critical distinction from check_export_license. Each sentence earns its place; the length is justified by the tool's behavioral complexity, and there is no filler.

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?

Despite the output schema existing, the description explains the key return variants (chartDetermined false/indeterminate), the relationship to licence checking, and the limitation about classification. This covers the tricky parts an agent needs to know to invoke the tool correctly and interpret results.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already describes the eccn parameter as 'Export Control Classification Number, e.g. 5A002.' The description adds little beyond calling it 'one ECCN' and using the term repeatedly; no new format, constraints, or examples are provided beyond 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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Look up one ECCN on the Commerce Control List and return its title, its reasons for control, and the chart column each reason maps to.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings: it doesn't check licenses (check_export_license), explain reason codes (explain_reason_code), or look up countries (lookup_country).

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?

The description explicitly states when to use this tool ('to understand why an item is controlled, or to see the scope caveats') and gives an exclusion: 'Knowing an entry's reasons for control does not tell you whether a licence is required for a destination; pass the ECCN to check_export_license for that.' It also notes a limitation: 'This tool cannot tell you whether an item falls under this ECCN.'

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