verified-ai-free-tiers

get_china_ai_rules

Check what applies when publishing AI-generated content to mainland China platforms, and which AI tools are reachable from mainland China without a VPN. Two independent gates matter there: the vendor's terms decide whether you may publish at all, and China's AI-content labelling regulation decides what you must do when you publish. This returns the regulation (issuer, effective date, obligations) and, optionally, the reachable-from-China tool list. Not legal advice.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lang`	No	Data language, default en
`category`	No	Optionally also list tools in this category that work from mainland China

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and explains the two independent gates, what the tool returns (issuer, effective date, obligations, optional tool list), and includes a 'Not legal advice' disclaimer. It does not describe any additional side effects or rate limits, but for this kind of informational tool, it is transparent.

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 three sentences with no filler. It front-loads the purpose, explains the nuance of the two gates, and ends with a concise return-value summary plus legal disclaimer. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The tool has no output schema, and the description compensates by explicitly naming the return fields: regulation issuer, effective date, obligations, and optionally the tool list. It also contextualizes why the regulation matters, making it sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's full behavior.

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 both parameters (lang, category) have clear descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds a little context about the category parameter being optional and related to the reachable-from-China list, but does not need to do much more. Baseline of 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: 'Check what applies when publishing AI-generated content to mainland China platforms' and 'which AI tools are reachable from mainland China without a VPN'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools focused on free tiers and commercial use.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: when dealing with publishing AI content to mainland China or checking VPN-free tool reachability. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous, so it slightly misses the top score.

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

All verified-ai-free-tiers tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a clearly distinct task: querying limits, checking commercial use, fact-checking claims, comparing categories, searching the directory, auditing stacks, building workflows, and monitoring changes. Even the two change-related tools are differentiated by one being a query and the other a subscription.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent lowercase snake_case verb_noun pattern (audit_, build_, check_, compare_, explain_, find_, get_, search_, watch_). Repeated verbs like check_ and get_ are paired with distinct objects, making the pattern predictable and easy to scan.

Tool Count5/5

At 14 tools, the set is well-scoped for the breadth of the domain (verifying free tiers, checking commercial use, tracking changes, building workflows, and China-specific rules). Each tool earns its place without redundancy, fitting comfortably within the ideal range.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full lifecycle: querying a single tool's limit, comparing across categories, searching the directory, fact-checking claims, explaining missing data, finding alternatives, auditing a stack, calculating quota fit, and both reading and subscribing to changes. No obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated purpose.

Resources

Need Help?