Skip to main content
Glama

Vaquill

by io.github.Vaquill-AI
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

IPC/CrPC to BNS/BNSS Mapping

get_corresponding_provisions
Read-only

Map a repealed Indian criminal code to the 2023 code that replaced it, section by section: IPC to BNS and CrPC to BNSS, in force from 1 July 2024. Pass either side ('ipc' or 'bns' both work). Use whenever a source, a pleading or the user cites an old section number, so you answer under the provision actually in force rather than the repealed one. 'iea'/'bsa' return 404 until that mapping lands. Cost: 1 credit.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
act_codeYesEither side of a recodification pair, matched case-insensitively so `IPC` and `ipc` are the same request. `ipc`/`bns` and `crpc`/`bnss` each return the same mapping; `iea`/`bsa` are accepted and 404 until that mapping lands. Values: `ipc`, `crpc`, `iea`, `bns`, `bnss`, `bsa`.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / act_code / description
      Previous value: -"Act code: ipc, crpc, iea, bns, bnss or bsa"New value: +"Either side of a recodification pair, matched case-insensitively so `IPC` and `ipc` are the same request. `ipc`/`bns` and `crpc`/`bnss` each return the same mapping; `iea`/`bsa` are accepted and 404 until that mapping lands. Values: `ipc`, `crpc`, `iea`, `bns`, `bnss`, `bsa`."
    • addedInput schema / properties / act_code / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "ipc",
+  "crpc",
+  "iea",
+  "bns",
+  "bnss",
+  "bsa"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / act_code / examples
      Added value: +[
+  "ipc"
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: both directions ('ipc' or 'bns') return the same mapping, 'iea'/'bsa' return 404 until mapping lands, and the tool costs 1 credit. This is meaningful operational context without contradicting the annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded: purpose first, then usage trigger, then edge-case behavior, then cost. Every sentence carries useful information, with no filler or repetition of schema boilerplate.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers everything an agent needs: what the mapping is, when to use it, how the input direction works, the iea/bsa failure mode, the effective date, and the cost. Nothing material is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the schema already explaining case-insensitivity, the equivalence of paired codes, and the 404 behavior for 'iea'/'bsa'. The description largely restates this information ('Pass either side...'), so it adds little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 and resource: 'Map a repealed Indian criminal code to the 2023 code that replaced it, section by section: IPC to BNS and CrPC to BNSS.' It clearly distinguishes this mapping tool from sibling tools like get_act_section or resolve_india_citation by naming the exact code pairs and their effective date.

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?

The description gives an explicit trigger: 'Use whenever a source, a pleading or the user cites an old section number, so you answer under the provision actually in force rather than the repealed one.' This is clear context, though it does not name or exclude alternative sibling tools explicitly.

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

All Vaquill 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