Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Bosco Labs data

by io.github.Bosco-Labs
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Plan an official-records query

plan_official_records_query
Read-onlyIdempotent

Free, no key needed. Turns a question in plain words into the exact typed Bosco Labs calls that answer it: tool, input, why, and the maximum price of each step, plus what is not covered. Pass the user's question verbatim AND the entities you extracted from it (company_names, tickers, identifiers, countries, dates, law references...): the planner trusts your entities over its own parsing and puts them in the right input fields. The plan echoes them in entities_used and lists in missing what to pass for a better plan. Rules and examples first; only when they are unsure and you passed no entities does a small AI step extract the entities (budget-capped, marked assisted). Same steps, same plan_id. Run it with run_official_records_plan (paid, max_usd) or call the listed tools directly. Low confidence returns the top 3 candidate tools instead.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
entitiesNoWhat you (the calling agent) already extracted from the user's question. Extract these from the question yourself; the planner trusts them over its own parsing and puts them in the right input fields. The plan echoes them in `entities_used` and names what is still missing in `missing`, so you can re-call with more.
questionYesThe user's question, verbatim, e.g. "Is Rosneft on the EU sanctions list?" (English, Dutch, German or French).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / entities / properties / identifiers / description
      Previous value: -"Identifiers by kind, each a list of strings: lei, isin, cik, figi, company_number, kvk, cvr, org_number, nct, cve, ecli, celex, cfr, hs_code, naics, postcode, bag_id. company_number may carry its country as a prefix: \"GB:00445790\"."New value: +"Identifiers by kind, each a list of strings: lei, isin, cik, figi, company_number, kvk, cvr, org_number, nct, cve, ecli, celex, cfr, hs_code, naics, postcode, bag_id, vat, iban, wallet, krs, nip, regon. company_number may carry its country as a prefix: \"GB:00445790\"."
  2. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / entities / description
      Previous value: -"Optional, what you already know: names, tickers, countries (ISO-2), lei, company_numbers (lists), keywords (text)."New value: +"What you (the calling agent) already extracted from the user's question. Extract these from the question yourself; the planner trusts them over its own parsing and puts them in the right input fields. The plan echoes them in `entities_used` and names what is still missing in `missing`, so you can re-call with more."
    • addedInput schema / properties / entities / properties
      Added value: +{
+  "addresses": {
+    "description": "Dutch addresses as written, e.g. [\"Damrak 1 Amsterdam\"].",
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "amount_min": {
+    "description": "A minimum amount in USD or EUR, e.g. 1000000 for \"over $1M\".",
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  "company_names": {
+    "description": "Companies, with legal form if given, e.g. [\"Novo Nordisk A/S\"]; also fund managers and hiring companies.",
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "countries": {
+    "description": "ISO 3166 alpha-2 codes (or English names), e.g. [\"DE\", \"NL\"]: the registry country, buyer country, origin of goods or trial location.",
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "date_from": {
+    "description": "YYYY-MM-DD, start of the asked period (resolve relative dates).",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "date_to": {
+    "description": "YYYY-MM-DD, end of the asked period.",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "identifiers": {
+    "description": "Identifiers by kind, each a list of strings: lei, isin, cik, figi, company_number, kvk, cvr, org_number, nct, cve, ecli, celex, cfr, hs_code, naics, postcode, bag_id. company_number may carry its country as a prefix: \"GB:00445790\".",
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "keywords": {
+    "description": "The topic or search phrase in the user's words, e.g. \"cloud hosting\", \"huurrecht\", \"non-small cell lung cancer\".",
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  "law": {
+    "description": "A law reference: {\"act\": \"GDPR\", \"article\": \"6\"} or {\"act\": \"Companies Act 2006\", \"article\": \"172\", \"jurisdiction\": \"UK\"}; jurisdiction EU, UK or NL.",
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "package": {
+    "description": "A software package: {\"ecosystem\": \"npm\", \"name\": \"lodash\", \"version\": \"4.17.15\"}.",
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "person_names": {
+    "description": "People, e.g. [\"Nancy Pelosi\"] (House members, sanctions targets).",
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "products": {
+    "description": "Drugs, consumer products or goods, e.g. [\"Ozempic\"], [\"2019 Honda Accord\"], [\"cotton t-shirt\"].",
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  "tickers": {
+    "description": "US stock tickers, e.g. [\"NVDA\", \"BRK-B\"].",
+    "items": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "type": "array"
+  }
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / question / description
      Previous value: -"The question, e.g. \"Is Rosneft on the EU sanctions list?\""New value: +"The user's question, verbatim, e.g. \"Is Rosneft on the EU sanctions list?\" (English, Dutch, German or French)."
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive annotations, it discloses cost ('free, no key needed'), deterministic behavior ('Same steps, same plan_id'), a budget-capped optional AI extraction step marked `assisted` that fires only when no entities are passed, and the degradation path returning three candidates. It even names the output fields (`entities_used`, `missing`, `plan_id`, max price) that an agent would otherwise have to discover by calling.

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 core contract is front-loaded and every clause carries information, but it is a single dense paragraph of fragments and colon lists that takes close attention to parse. It is efficient rather than padded, though splitting the entity-trust rule from the cost/execution rules would improve scannability.

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 two-parameter planner with no output schema, it covers everything an agent needs: what it returns, that it is free and deterministic, how entity passing improves the plan, the assisted-extraction fallback, and how to proceed to paid execution. No structural question is left open before invoking it.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantic weight: it says to pass the question verbatim *and* extracted entities, explains that the planner trusts the entities over its own parsing, and that they are echoed in `entities_used` with `missing` naming what to add on a re-call. That is behavioral meaning the schema itself cannot express.

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 precise verb+resource combination: it 'turns a question in plain words into the exact typed Bosco Labs calls', listing what the plan contains (tool, input, why, max price, gaps). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling that executes those calls ('Run it with run_official_records_plan (paid, max_usd) or call the listed tools directly'), so an agent can separate planning from execution without opening a schema.

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 names the execution path (run_official_records_plan with max_usd) and the alternative of calling listed tools directly, and states the precedence rule that user-supplied entities beat the planner's own parsing. It also describes the low-confidence fallback (top 3 candidate tools). What it lacks is an explicit 'do not use this when you already know the tool' exclusion, so the routing is clear but not fully bounded.

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

All Bosco Labs data 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