Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

ParliamentOS – Bundestag, Landtage, Nationalrat, EU

by io.consiliumos
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Vorgänge DE, AT und EU vergleichen

compare_dach_vorgaenge
Read-onlyIdempotent

Sucht denselben Begriff parallel in deutschen Bundestags-Vorgängen und österreichischen Ministerialentwürfen/Begutachtungsverfahren und zeigt beide Ergebnislisten nebeneinander. Keine automatische Verknüpfung — die inhaltliche Zuordnung (ob es sich um dieselbe EU-Richtlinie/dasselbe Thema handelt) trifft der Nutzer selbst. Jeder Treffer nennt am Ende der Antwort Kennung, Beleg-Seite und Original; zitiere mit Kennung und beiden Links wie in der Server-Anleitung. [Ohne KI: liefert ausschließlich Originaldaten aus amtlichen Quellen.]

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": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "compare_dach_vorgaenge"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoAnzahl Ergebnisse je Land. Standard: 5
queryYesSuchbegriff, z. B. 'Lieferkettengesetz' oder 'Mindestlohn'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false), and the description still adds real value: it discloses that no automatic linking is performed, that every hit ends with Kennung, Beleg-Seite and Original, and that citation should follow the Kennung plus both links per the server instructions. The bracketed note on official-source-only data further clarifies provenance.

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?

Four tight sentences with the core action front-loaded, followed by the interpretive caveat and then the citation/output convention. No filler; the bracketed disclaimer is short and informative.

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 usefully characterizes the return value (two parallel result lists, each hit ending with Kennung, Beleg-Seite, Original) and warns that matching is manual. The only gap is the unexplained EU element in the title that the body never addresses.

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 both query and limit already documented and limit carrying a default of 5 per country. The description adds nothing about parameter behavior, so the schema does the heavy lifting and the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a concrete verb-plus-resource framing ("Sucht denselben Begriff parallel in deutschen Bundestags-Vorgängen und österreichischen Ministerialentwürfen") and explicitly says the output is two result lists side by side, which separates it from the single-source sibling searches. Minor ambiguity: the title promises "DE, AT und EU" but the description names only DE and AT sources, leaving the EU angle implicit.

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?

Usage is implied rather than spelled out: the tool is for comparing the same term across two jurisdictions, and the description makes clear that no automatic matching happens, so the user must judge topical equivalence. It never names an alternative (e.g. a single-country search tool) or states when this comparison is the wrong choice.

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

All ParliamentOS – Bundestag, Landtage, Nationalrat, EU 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