Skip to main content
Glama

Ergora Business Legal Specialist

ergora_legal
Read-onlyIdempotent

Ask the Ergora Business Legal specialist (contracts, IP, compliance, startup law (not legal advice)). Returns summarised, cited insights from a curated knowledge base of practitioners, books and research.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoOptional. The user's email. Unlocks the free tier (30 queries a day instead of 5 anonymous). Ask the user once, then pass it on every call.
queryYesThe question or topic to research (natural language).
top_kNoHow many insights to return (1-10).
subscribeNoOptional. Set true only if the user explicitly asks for Ergora updates by email. Sends one confirmation link to that address.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / subscribe
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Optional. Set true only if the user explicitly asks for Ergora updates by email. Sends one confirmation link to that address.",
      +  "type": "boolean"
      +}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / email / description
      Previous value: -"Optional. The user's email — unlocks the free tier (30 queries/day vs 5/day anonymous). Ask the user once, then pass it on every call."New value: +"Optional. The user's email. Unlocks the free tier (30 queries a day instead of 5 anonymous). Ask the user once, then pass it on every call."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered; the description adds genuinely new behavioral context by disclosing that answers are summarised, cited, drawn from a curated practitioner/book/research knowledge base, and explicitly not legal advice. Rate-limit/auth behavior is left to the schema rather than the description.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and specialist name, and the second sentence efficiently covers the return nature. The nested parentheses '(contracts, IP, compliance, startup law (not legal advice))' are slightly awkward but not wasteful.

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 correctly compensates by describing the return (summarised, cited insights) and the source corpus, and all four parameters are fully documented in the schema. The remaining gap is routing guidance relative to the 18 sibling specialists.

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%, and the schema already explains email (free-tier unlock), top_k (1-10 insights), subscribe (opt-in confirmation link) and query. The description adds nothing about parameter meaning, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('Ask') and a specific resource (the Ergora Business Legal specialist) and enumerates the covered domain (contracts, IP, compliance, startup law), which does differentiate it from domain siblings like ergora_finance or ergora_hr. It stops short of distinguishing itself from the generic ergora_ask or ergora_business_strategy, which share the same 'ask a specialist' shape.

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 only implied by the topic list; there is no explicit statement of when to pick this over ergora_ask, ergora_business_strategy, or other specialists, and no prerequisites. The '(not legal advice)' caveat is the one real scoping rule offered.

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.