Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ProofPass

by eu.proofpass
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Which duties apply to a role and product type

check_duties
Read-onlyIdempotent

Runs ProofPass’s duties check (the same logic as the page /de/pflichten-check): from the role, the product types, the sales channels and the markets it returns the duties that already apply, those adopted with a later date and those expected, each with date, provision and legal sources, plus the link to the same result on the site. It knows the roles manufacturer, importer, distributor and online seller; for a downstream user it says so and derives nothing. Not legal advice.

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": {
      "role": "<role>",
      "product_types": "<product_types>"
    },
    "name": "check_duties"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
roleYesRole in the supply chain
marketsNoMarkets: at (Austria), de (Germany), eu (other EU countries, default)
channelsNoSales channels: b2b (default), own_shop, marketplace
languageNoLanguage of the answer: "de" (German, default), "en" (English) or "pl" (Polish). Product and account answers are written in German and English; content without a translation comes in German.
product_typesYesWhat is sold: mixture (hazardous substance or mixture), construction_product, consumer_product, battery, machine, radio_equipment, detergent, textile, packaging

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description is free to add real behavioral context — the result is bucketed into already-applicable, later-adopted and expected duties, each with date, provision and legal sources plus a link. It also discloses the known roles and the important edge case that downstream_user returns a statement rather than derived duties, and carries a 'Not legal advice' caveat.

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?

A single front-loaded paragraph that leads with what the tool does and what it returns, then closes with limits and the legal disclaimer. It is dense but every clause carries information; only the web-page path reference is arguably expendable.

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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately compensates by describing the three result buckets, their fields and the accompanying site link. For a five-parameter read-only lookup this is close to complete, though it says nothing about empty results or how the answer is localized to the requested language.

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% with enum values documented per field, so the schema does the heavy lifting; the description only echoes the four input axes and does not mention the language parameter or the defaulting behavior. The downstream_user remark adds modest meaning but largely restates an enum value.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Runs ProofPass's duties check') and enumerates the inputs and the shape of the result (applying / later-dated / expected duties with dates, provisions and legal sources). It is clearly a compliance-duty lookup, but it never names or contrasts a sibling such as list_open_duties, so the boundary between this and other duty-related tools is left to inference.

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 trigger conditions are implied through the input axes ('from the role, the product types, the sales channels and the markets'), which tells an agent roughly when the tool applies. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement and no pointer to an alternative tool for adjacent questions (e.g. listing already-open duties).

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

All ProofPass 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