RCO-A2A - Regulatory Compliance Objects

Resolve compliance state

resolve_compliance

Read-onlyIdempotent

Return the current signed Regulatory Compliance Object for an object in a jurisdiction. Deterministic. Inside the resolved universe (SPEC v1.2 pairs.json + the jurisdiction doors' own objects) an unknown object returns a pre-resolved, signed CPG-404 record; outside it the typed error record_not_found is returned - nothing is signed at request time. Never narrative.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`object_id`	Yes
`jurisdiction`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`state`	Yes
`issuer`	Yes
`key_id`	Yes
`signal`	Yes
`eco_ref`	Yes
`rule_set`	Yes
`object_id`	Yes
`record_id`	Yes
`signature`	Yes	Detached JWS Compact Serialization (RFC 7515) with unencoded payload (RFC 7797): BASE64URL(protected header {alg:ES256, b64:false, crit:[b64], kid}) '..' BASE64URL(ES256 raw R\|\|S). Signing input = ASCII(BASE64URL(protected header) '.') \|\| RFC 8785 canonical JSON of the record with this member removed. Test vectors: signature-test-vectors.json.
`case_study`	No
`conditions`	No
`supersedes`	Yes
`rco_version`	Yes
`resolved_at`	Yes
`valid_until`	Yes
`jurisdiction`	Yes
`evidence_refs`	Yes
`verification_url`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedSep 17, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
removedOutput schema / properties / conditions / items / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

changedOutput schema / properties / eco_ref / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  },
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": false,
-    "properties": {
-      "hash": {
-        "pattern": "^sha256:[a-f0-9]{64}$",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "url": {
-        "format": "uri",
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "url",
-      "hash"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  },
+  {
+    "properties": {
+      "hash": {
+        "pattern": "^sha256:[a-f0-9]{64}$",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "url": {
+        "format": "uri",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "url",
+      "hash"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]

removedOutput schema / properties / evidence_refs / items / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
removedOutput schema / properties / issuer / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
removedOutput schema / properties / rule_set / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, openWorldHint) by disclosing specific behaviors: deterministic output, a pre-resolved signed CPG-404 record for unknown objects inside the resolved universe, a typed error outside it, and 'nothing is signed at request time'. These details about error handling and determinism are valuable and not covered by 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 front-loaded with the core action, followed by concise, high-value details. Every sentence adds meaning (deterministic, closed-world behavior, error handling, output style). No filler or redundancy, making it efficient while informatively dense.

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 description covers the essential behavioral context for a deterministic, read-only tool: it defines the scope of the resolved universe, specifies return behavior for unknown objects and error cases, and clarifies that no on-the-fly signing occurs. Since an output schema exists, return values are documented elsewhere, so the description leaves little an agent needs to call it correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it only references 'object' and 'jurisdiction' indirectly. It does not explicitly document the object_id pattern (gtin/host) or the jurisdiction enum semantics beyond what the schema enforces. It adds behavioral context (how object relates to universe) but not parameter-specific semantics, so a 3.

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 states a specific verb ('Return') and a clear resource ('signed Regulatory Compliance Object') with the scope ('for an object in a jurisdiction'). This clearly differentiates from siblings like get_record (generic record retrieval) and publish_record (writing), so an agent can identify this tool's purpose without ambiguity.

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 implies this tool is for retrieving compliance state (as opposed to publishing or listing), and it clarifies behavior (deterministic, closed world). However, it never explicitly contrasts with siblings or states when NOT to use it. It provides clear contextual differentiation but lacks explicit exclusions, so a 4.

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

All RCO-A2A - Regulatory Compliance Objects tools Inspect

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.