sebi_circulars
SEBI circulars by topic substring and date.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| topic | No | ||
| date_to | No | ||
| date_from | No |
Indian Regulatory Data
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, if authentication is needed, rate limits, or any side effects. For a search tool, read-only is implied but not stated.
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?
The description is extremely concise, using one sentence. However, it sacrifices essential context. While brevity is valued, the tool would benefit from a slightly longer description to improve clarity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return format, pagination, sorting, or input validation. Sibling tools are not differentiated, leaving the agent guessing about appropriate usage.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters2/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0%, and the description adds minimal meaning: it mentions 'topic substring' but does not clarify date format, default behavior of limit, or that date_from/date_to are strings. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.
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?
The description clearly states the tool retrieves SEBI circulars, with filtering by topic substring and date. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'rbi_circulars' and 'sebi_orders', though it could be more specific about the output.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools are listed but not compared; the description lacks context on when this tool is preferred over 'rbi_circulars' or 'sebi_orders'.
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.
TDQS
B3.3/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct regulatory domain: AMFI for mutual funds, GST for tax verification, RBI for central bank circulars/press releases, and SEBI for securities circulars/orders. No overlapping purposes.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent pattern of organization_entity (e.g., rbi_circulars, sebi_orders), using snake_case throughout. Predictable and clear.
Tool Count5/5
With 6 tools covering major Indian financial regulators, the count is well-scoped for the server's purpose. Each tool addresses a distinct need without redundancy.
Completeness4/5
The set covers key regulatory bodies (AMFI, GST, RBI, SEBI) but misses others like income tax, MCA, IRDAI, or PFRDA. Within the covered agencies, core document types are present, but some secondary resources are absent.