Skip to main content
Glama

List EU trade defence measures

trade_list_measures
Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns EU anti-dumping, countervailing, safeguard and steel regulations published in the Official Journal (EUR-Lex), with products, origin countries and the CN/TARIC codes they name. Use it to find trade defence actions on a product or country; use trade_list_quotas for tariff quota volumes, and TARIC for binding duty rates and quota balances. Inputs (all optional, they narrow together): cn (CN/TARIC code, 4 to 10 digits, e.g. 7208; matches broader and narrower codes on the first 8 digits), since (YYYY-MM-DD), instrument, action, country (origin name part, e.g. China), limit (1 to 50, default 20) and cursor (next_cursor, same filters). Output: measures[] with celex, title, action, instrument, products, origin countries, CN/TARIC codes, EUR-Lex URL and observed_at, plus next_cursor and feed freshness; EUR-Lex is checked twice a day. Extracted codes are not a binding duty rate. For one act use HTTP GET /v1/eu/trade-defence/measures/{celex} (see /openapi.json). Terms: read-only; MCP calls are never charged. Without a key, metered routes give 10 successful answers a day free, as short samples (up to 3 records, without file proof, history or paging cursor) where a paid HTTP address exists (unmetered routes are unlimited); errors do not count. On the paid HTTP routes, errors are free, and so are empty answers except a sanctions name search with no match when every loaded list it checks is fresh (lists not loaded yet are named in the answer). An optional API key keeps its prepaid-credit policy. When the free answers run out, the error names the HTTP alternative.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "trade_list_measures"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cnNoCN/TARIC code, 4 to 10 digits after removing spaces and dots, e.g. 7208 or 72085120
limitNoRegulations per page, 1 to 50 (default 20); e.g. 20.
sinceNoRegulations dated on or after, YYYY-MM-DD; e.g. 2026-10-01. Must be a parseable YYYY-MM-DD date.
actionNoOne kind of action only Allowed: provisional, definitive, amendment, extension, repeal, termination, registration, initiation, quota, other; e.g. provisional.
cursorNoOpaque next_cursor from this tool's prior answer; t followed by 1 to 12 digits, e.g. t0. Keep filters unchanged; omit on first call.
countryNoOrigin name substring, 3 to 60 Unicode letters or spaces/punctuation (period, apostrophe, parentheses, hyphen), e.g. China; omit for all origins
instrumentNoOne instrument only (steel: acts under the EU steel regime, Regulation 2026/1384) Allowed: anti-dumping, countervailing, safeguard, steel; e.g. anti-dumping.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: the response shape (celex, title, action, instrument, products, origin countries, codes, EUR-Lex URL, observed_at, next_cursor), source freshness ('EUR-Lex is checked twice a day'), and an important caveat that extracted codes are not a binding duty rate. It also discloses the metering/free-answer policy and that MCP calls are never charged.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The opening is well front-loaded, but the tail balloons into several sentences of metering boilerplate, including an irrelevant clause about 'a sanctions name search with no match' that has nothing to do with this tool. That verbosity dilutes an otherwise efficient definition.

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 7-parameter read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return fields, pagination cursor, feed freshness cadence, and an explicit caveat about code interpretation. An agent has everything needed to call it and to interpret the answer correctly.

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 meaning: it says all inputs are optional and 'narrow together' (conjunctive filtering), and explains that cn matches broader and narrower codes on the first 8 digits — a matching behavior not evident from the schema. The cursor note ('next_cursor, same filters') reinforces the pagination contract, though instrument/action enum semantics are largely left to 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 first sentence names a specific verb and resource set — 'EU anti-dumping, countervailing, safeguard and steel regulations published in the Official Journal (EUR-Lex)' — plus what each record carries (products, origin countries, CN/TARIC codes). It is immediately distinguishable from trade_list_quotas and from TARIC duty-rate lookup.

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?

States the intended use ('find trade defence actions on a product or country') and explicitly routes two alternatives elsewhere: trade_list_quotas for tariff quota volumes, TARIC for binding duty rates and quota balances. It also names the single-act endpoint (GET /v1/eu/trade-defence/measures/{celex}) for one regulation, so the when-to-use-this-vs-something-else decision is fully covered.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.